[On3] BREAKING: The SEC has filed a lawsuit against LSU and head football coach Lane Kiffin, @PeteNakos reports.

[u/Fonzie5]

https://x.com/on3/status/2095555292859646137?s=46&t=FavtrbPsHpJY8Odvh2TYUA

[u/legitimacys]

They are suing because LSU violated the SEC's first amendment rights. That's interesting. I don't know what I expected it to be, but it wasn't first amendment rights. 

[u/CrashB111 → u/legitimacys]

First amendment rights aren't just free speech, but freedom of association. Which includes being able to set rules around membership in private organizations, like an athletic conference, so long as they aren't protected classes like race, gender, religion, etc.

By breaking SEC rules to sign these players, LSU is infringing upon the other 15 members rights to freedom of association because they all agreed to abide by the SECs rules to be part of the organization.

[u/UpsideTurtles → u/CrashB111]

Any time these law suits happen im always confused by some of the filings until someone (like you!) comes in and explains it really well, then it makes perfect sense. But I guess that’s literally what a lawyer is for lol

[u/NotYourTypicalNurse → u/CrashB111]

What SEC rules did they break? Genuinely asking, I don’t know

[u/littlegreensir → u/NotYourTypicalNurse]

As far as I understand it, once you've declared for the draft you're done with college participation. You're considered a professional, which means you cannot participate in the amateur college football leagues. The problem with this is that the players in question only declared for the draft because the NCAA told them they were out of eligibility, so they needed to move on. Then they get told they can go back because of a temporary restraining order and...here we are.

[u/olivejinnflower → u/littlegreensir]

The problem with this is that the players in question only declared for the draft because the NCAA told them they were out of eligibility, so they needed to move on. Then they get told they can go back because of a temporary restraining order and...here we are.

This part of the story I had not heard before.

[u/EmotionalTater → u/NotYourTypicalNurse]

Other commenter is wrong. The SEC (and the other P4 conferences) just recently voted and passed a rule saying athletes who signed a contract with a professional team can’t be rostered by a conference member anymore.

It has nothing to do with declaring or trying out for a team. Other teams have players who tried out for NFL teams after going undrafted, but never signed a contract. LSU is the only confirmed team currently trying to roster players who were signed to NFL teams (given it was only for preseason games before they were cut). 

[u/JBrody → u/CrashB111]

TIL

[u/ThatGuytoDeny165 → u/CrashB111]

But the question is how will the judge who enjoined the SEC to the TRO last week feel about the league doing this? My guess, he isn’t going to be happy about this.

[u/CrashB111 → u/ThatGuytoDeny165]

Probably why the case will end up in federal court because it crosses state lines and involves public universities across multiple states.

Cases get kicked up to the feds all the time.

[u/bucki_fan → u/CrashB111]

There's probably a motion to remove waiting to be sent and then one to consolidate ready to go.

[u/bucki_fan → u/ThatGuytoDeny165]

That judge is at the state court level. The lawsuit here is federal, and the federal rulings override state ones in most situations.

IOW, the state judge has to pretty well sit there and take it. It doesn't invalidate his ruling or his TRO, there's just a different judge looking at a different aspect of law who's decision may make his ruling unenforceable.

[u/Cool_of_a_Took → u/CrashB111]

Whether or not it is a lawful rule continues to be the question that actually needs answering. This doesn't change anything.

[u/EpiphanyTwisted → u/CrashB111]

yeahbut only the government can violate 1st Amendment rights. SEC has a remedy, they just don't want to pursue it.

[u/CrashB111 → u/EpiphanyTwisted]

SEC has a remedy, they just don't want to pursue it.

They actually can't. Because the Baton Rouge judge's TRO says they can't punish LSU for these players.

Hence the lawsuit saying their rights are being violated.

[u/tangential_quip → u/legitimacys]

It's necessary to get into federal court. Without a federal question there would be no jurisdiction.

[u/A_Stoned_Saint → u/legitimacys]

It's the only path they have since whatever "recruiting" went on was before the rule they created like a week ago. Probably just trying lawfare to run out the clock. Juice isn't worth the squeeze

[u/wowthisislong → u/A_Stoned_Saint]

"juice isnt worth the squeeze" is also what kiffin said when he left his dog in oxford

[u/katarh → u/wowthisislong]

JUSTICE FOR JUICE

[u/Muffinnnnnnn → u/wowthisislong]

Idk why you're downvoted, this was good

[u/jrh038 → u/A_Stoned_Saint]

I've said this in other threads. The NCAA, and SEC have an issue in Texas. If Cole Huston wasn't granted a 5th year, and eligibility this wouldn't exist.

It's obvious LSU saw a player who declared for the draft, and went to minicamps allowed to play again this year. LSU rightfully assumed any player who meet this criiteria would be allowed to play. LSU is going to argue they recruited with a reasonable assumption of eligibilie players.

I have no idea how the NCAA, or SEC really defends it's position in court. I also think this is why LSU hasn't backed down.

[u/Tarmacked → u/jrh038]

Huston never signed a professional contract, essentially just went to a tryout.

There’s a lot more nuance than you’re giving here

[u/jrh038 → u/Tarmacked]

Huston never signed a professional contract, essentially just went to a tryout.

Not really, was he compensated or not? Did those teams cover meals, lodging, or travel? If so, he was paid.

[u/Unrelenting_Salsa → u/Tarmacked]

There's really not. A condition of the return is that they return all earnings from the contract, and just from a practical standpoint, it just means that Cole Hutson is about 5% worse as a player. They're both practice squad at best players.

[u/FormalBasket9509 → u/legitimacys]

Right to associate. It’s a good strategy for an argument. First amendment law has been getting strengthened at the Supreme Court under those types of arguments. And it’s a voluntary association and all parties agreed to the rule

[u/Cool_of_a_Took → u/FormalBasket9509]

But if a court decides that the rule is not allowed, then what? This still just depends on the case that already existed.

[u/Shot-Toe-2884 → u/legitimacys]

They are not wrong either. A lousiana judge telling a conference in Georgia it can't enforce let alone even discuss its own rules is an obvious violation of a business entity's first amendment rights.

[u/hm_rickross_ymoh → u/Shot-Toe-2884]

Unless the rules are illegal, which is currently up for debate. 

[u/geaux124 → u/hm_rickross_ymoh]

This. They can't make a rule banning schools from having black players and then claim a 1A violation if a school signs black players.

[u/Tarmacked → u/geaux124]

Just so we’re clear, that’s illegal because of the equal rights act. That has nothing to do with freedom of association and setting eligibility requirements on non race, gender, etc. metrics like this one.

The SEC’s argument is much more sound, similar to the PGA Tour having age brackets or amateur/pro splits.

[u/geaux124 → u/Tarmacked]

I was just using it an example of a rule that was already illegal.