Donald Sterling and Racism

[alfred russel]

We shall see. Some of the owners are actually corporations which are limited in their ability to say racist things.

People who work in or run corporations can say racist things.

And then the board of directors is appalled that such a person is employed by them, and terminates him immediately; issuing a very firm statement that the company in no way supports or tolerates racial discrimination of any kind, etc.

Unless you find the board of directors discussing their support for racism amongst themselves, I don't think you have much. Others may see it differently though.

[derspiess]

And then the board of directors is appalled that such a person is employed by them, and terminates him immediately; issuing a very firm statement that the company in no way supports or tolerates racial discrimination of any kind, etc.

Unless you find the board of directors discussing their support for racism amongst themselves, I don't think you have much. Others may see it differently though.

It's enough for a news story these days.  Maybe the NAACP is already on the job, selling them indulgences.

[CountDeMoney]

With Jeremy Clarkson now apparently caught saying the naughty word, he will be forced to sell his cars.

I hope the NFL makes Irsay sell the Colts, but the prosecutors seizing them as forfeiture would work, too.

[Malthus]

Its a nice bit of speculation but there would first have to be a cause of action which made all of that information relevant.

His allegation = breach of contract; that his racism is not unethical business conduct sufficient to justify his ouster under the terms of the agreement.

Part of his evidence: that racist comments were part of the general background banter commonly indulged in by owners and has nothing to do with the actual conduct of business. He introduces into evidence lots of examples in order to demonstrate this is the case.

You are confusing the league constituting documents with an employment contract where that sort of argument would be relevant. This isnt really a breach of contract case.  The league acts like a Society which gives discretion to the commissioner to act with the powers of an arbitrator and who's decisions are ratified by the rest of the Society according to its bylaws.

The only way to attack that decision is to argue that the bylaws of the league were not followed.  ie an administrative law question.

Edit: and I should add, a legal question to which to evidence Timmay speculated about is completely irrelevant.

If it is subject to judicial review, the analysis is very similar - except instead of arguing breach of contract, he would be arguing that the decision was ultra vires the commissioner's powers under the constitution, in that it was made on the basis of an irrelevant consideration (that is, that he's a racist asshole who got noticed as such, when according to the analysis of some dude quoted upthread, the power to dismiss is conditional on him engaging in "unethical business").

Again, the issue would be (allegedly) whether being a racist asshole in coversation with his gold-digger is reasonably something that could be characterized as "unethical business" conduct. An argument could be made that trhe evidence is relevant to that.

[Admiral Yi]

What are the chances Sterling has racist rants by other owners on tape or on paper, signed?

[derspiess]

What are the chances Sterling has racist rants by other owners on tape or on paper, signed?

And what are the chances he forgot where he put them?

[Valmy]

Yeah I don't know if 80 year old senile people quite have it in them to take down the system.

[derspiess]

Yeah I don't know if 80 year old senile people quite have it in them to take down the system.

Perhaps by accident or dumb luck, but yeah.

[Eddie Teach]

What are the chances Sterling has racist rants by other owners on tape or on paper, signed?

Probably better than my chances at winning the Powerball.

[Malthus]

What are the chances Sterling has racist rants by other owners on tape or on paper, signed?

What are the chances he has "unwise" emails from the other owners? Dunno. Given the general stupidity people display around emails, it is possible.

[Malthus]

Yeah I don't know if 80 year old senile people quite have it in them to take down the system.

He's an 80 year old senile billionaire. He can hire people to do that for him.   

[crazy canuck]

Again, the issue would be (allegedly) whether being a racist asshole in coversation with his gold-digger is reasonably something that could be characterized as "unethical business" conduct. An argument could be made that trhe evidence is relevant to that.

I am not sure how it could be.  He would be making the argument, sure I am a racist asshole but so are the others and so they cant do this to me.  But that is not the legal test.  The legal test is whether the league's bylaws were followed.  Whether others were racist assholes isnt relevant.  What is relevant is whether being a racist asshole was a sufficent ground for the commissioner to exercise his authority under the bylaws.

The argument you are suggesting is very similar to a case I just finished where a person was found by a self regulating body to have commited a wrong.  The person's defence was sure I did it but so did x so you cant pick on me.  They dropped the case pretty quickly when it became clear to them through various unsuccessful interlocutory applications that the court was of the view that evidence that x also commited the wrong was not relevant.

[Admiral Yi]

What are the chances he has "unwise" emails from the other owners? Dunno. Given the general stupidity people display around emails, it is possible.

A billionth of a percent.

You multiply the probability of an NBA owner being stupid enough to put racist remarks in print times the probability of an NBA owner sending another NBA owner an email.

[derspiess]

What are the chances Sterling has racist rants by other owners on tape or on paper, signed?

What are the chances he has "unwise" emails from the other owners? Dunno. Given the general stupidity people display around emails, it is possible.

What are the chances he ever learned how to check email?

[dps]

Again, the issue would be (allegedly) whether being a racist asshole in coversation with his gold-digger is reasonably something that could be characterized as "unethical business" conduct. An argument could be made that trhe evidence is relevant to that.

I am not sure how it could be.  He would be making the argument, sure I am a racist asshole but so are the others and so they cant do this to me.  But that is not the legal test.  The legal test is whether the league's bylaws were followed.  Whether others were racist assholes isnt relevant.  What is relevant is whether being a racist asshole was a sufficent ground for the commissioner to exercise his authority under the bylaws.

The argument you are suggesting is very similar to a case I just finished where a person was found by a self regulating body to have commited a wrong.  The person's defence was sure I did it but so did x so you cant pick on me.  They dropped the case pretty quickly when it became clear to them through various unsuccessful interlocutory applications that the court was of the view that evidence that x also commited the wrong was not relevant.

How does this address the Malthus quote you posted?  It doesn't say anything about others being guilty of the same thing but rather questions whether being an admitted racist asshole constitutes unethical business practices.

Granted, it's probably a moot point because there probably is evidence that he has engaged in discriminatory practices in his business dealings, which certainly should constitute unethical business practices.