Additional racist comments attributed to Clippers' Donald Sterling released

1bigfan13

Your favorite player's favorite player
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
29,006
It only takes a 3/4 vote from the owners to remove him as an owner according to the NBA's constitution.
I haven't read anything from the NBA constitution but it seems highly illegal to be able to force someone to sell their property unless, as I mentioned above, they've previously agreed to some sort of code of conduct.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,869
I haven't read anything from the NBA constitution but it seems highly illegal to be able to force someone to sell their property unless, as I mentioned above, they've previously agreed to some sort of code of conduct.
I look forward to the inevitable litigation that is going to arise when he makes the fairly legitimate argument that a lifetime ban from all business dealings is tantamount to deprivation of his ownership rights.

I think Adam Silver overstepped on this one. No matter how repugnant he is, I don't think this flies.

Let the players refuse to sign there and coaches refuse to coach there. Eventually he'll be forced to sell the team or it will become such a mess they'll have other legitimate financial reasons to assume control of the franchise, beyond "We're going to punish him for his comments."

I would agree that the NBA doesn't have to associate with him if they don't want to, ie, it's not a "freedom of speech" issue, but the way the league is set up with ownership in franchises, they can't just lock him out unless they revoke the entire charter to the Clippers franchise.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,869
NEW YORK -- Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling has been banned for life by the NBA in response to racist comments the league says he made in a recorded conversation.

Commissioner Adam Silver said he will try to force the controversial owner to sell his franchise. Sterling has also been fined $2.5 million, and Silver made no effort to hide his outrage over the comments, calling them "deeply disturbing and harmful."

He said a league investigation found that the league's longest-tenured owner was in fact the person on the audiotapes that were released over the weekend.

"We stand together in condemning Mr. Sterling's views," Silver said. "They simply have no place in the NBA."

Sterling acknowledged he was the man on the tape, Silver said.

Sterling is immediately barred from attending any NBA games or practices, be present at any Clippers office or facility, or participate in any business or player personnel decisions involving the team.

He also cannot participate in any league business going forward.

"This league is far bigger than any one owner, any one coach and any one player," Silver said.

Silver said he would call on the owners to vote to force Sterling to sell the team. Such a move would require approval of three-quarters of the current owners.

The fine will be donated to organizations dedicated to anti-discrimination and tolerance efforts that will be jointly selected by the NBA and the Players Association, Silver said.

Sterling's comments were released over the weekend by TMZ and Deadspin, and the fallout has been swift: current and former NBA players have publicly denounced Sterling, the NAACP is returning donations he has made and canceled a planned award ceremony next month and sponsors have fled.

In the audio recording obtained by TMZ, a man alleged to be Sterling questions his girlfriend's association with minorities.

The man asks the Stiviano not to broadcast her association with black people or bring black people to games. The man specifically mentions Magic Johnson, the former Los Angeles Lakers star and NBA Hall of Famer, saying, "Don't bring him to my games, OK?"

"You can sleep with (black people). You can bring them in, you can do whatever you want," the man says on the tape. "The little I ask you is ... not to bring them to my games."

Before Silver took the podium, Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban tweeted out a photo of the NBA Constitution, saying "It exists for a reason."

The announcement of the sanctions came just hours before the Clippers will play Golden State in Game 5 of a knotted-up Western Conference first-round playoff series.

Several sponsors either terminated or suspended their business dealings with the team on Monday, though individual deals that some of those companies have with Clippers stars like Chris Paul and Blake Griffin will continue and were not affected. Still, it was a clear statement that companies, like just about everyone inside the league, were outraged.

The issues raised when the tapes were released over the weekend represent just another chapter in Sterling's long history of being at the center of controversy.

In the past, he's faced extensive federal charges of civil rights violations and racial discrimination in his business dealings, and some of his race-related statements would be described as shocking.

He has also been sued in the past for sexual harassment by former employees, and even the woman who goes by the name "V. Stiviano" - purportedly the female voice on the tapes at the center of this scandal - describes Sterling in court documents as a man "with a big toothy grin brandishing his sexual prowess in the faces of the Paparazzi and caring less what anyone else thought, the least of which, his own wife."

Stiviano is being sued by Rochelle Sterling, who is seeking to reclaim at least $1.8 million in cash and gifts that her husband allegedly provided the woman.

In modern professional sports, there is only one precedent for forcing an owner to sell their team for incendiary commentary: Marge Schott, who owned baseball's Cincinnati Reds from 1986 to 1999.

"They could try to force the owner to sell the team, but they'd have huge legal hurdles," CBS News legal analyst Jack Ford told "CBS This Morning." "It'd be tough to go into a court of law and say we're going to force him to give up his property, what he owns, because of his comments."

CBSSports.com's Ken Berger reports there are few parallels between what happened with Schott and what is happening with Sterling.

Schott was only forced to sell "after years of pressure from baseball and fellow owners, and only after General Motors accused her of falsifying car sales with the names of team employees at a Chevrolet dealership she had since sold. Even then, Schott reaped the financial benefit of the sale and retained one ownership share as well as 21 box seats and a luxury suite, according to this story from the Cincinnati Enquirer," Berger wrote.

The league's owners are wary of forcing Sterling to sell his team, even if it would bring him a financial windfall. The league took over the New Orleans Hornets from previous owner George Shinn, but that was because of financial difficulties. The Clippers are a profitable team and Sterling is worth a reported $1.9 billion, so money is not an issue in this case. Plus, taking such measures would almost assuredly bring a lawsuit from Sterling and a long, expensive legal fight.
 
Last edited:

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
125,464
I haven't read anything from the NBA constitution but it seems highly illegal to be able to force someone to sell their property unless, as I mentioned above, they've previously agreed to some sort of code of conduct.
If he refuses to sell they will just remove the team from the league would be my guess.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,869
If he refuses to sell they will just remove the team from the league would be my guess.
I doubt it gets that far.

Blake Griffin and Chris Paul have long term contracts with the Clippers, don't they? The league will cast those players out along with the Donald Sterling to teach an 80 year old racist a vindictive lesson? Sterling could get an injunction to prevent them from playing in the NBA if his team is removed from the league, I'm sure, since he still has a contract with them.

I think the NBA needs to seriously take a chill pill. 1 year suspension, a bigger fine, and mandate that he undergoes counseling or something.

The guy is a horrible human being. We get it.

Do you think any fans actually think he speaks for the league? Do you think that the league's reaction hasn't been strong and swift enough to make it clear that he doesn't speak for the rest of them? Does anyone think the league is run by racists because Sterling, who is a complete laughingstock and has been for decades, made some offhanded racist comments to his girlfriend (who is black, by the way... some racist he is)? Are minorities suffering any actual, demonstrable harm due to his lunatic ramblings?

Let his sponsors abandon him. Punishment enough.

Taking away his property, or forcing him to sell, seems wrong to me.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
125,464
I doubt it gets that far.

Blake Griffin and Chris Paul have long term contracts with the Clippers, don't they? The league will cast those players out along with the Donald Sterling to teach an 80 year old racist a vindictive lesson? Sterling could get an injunction to prevent them from playing in the NBA if his team is removed from the league, I'm sure, since he still has a contract with them.

I think the NBA needs to seriously take a chill pill. 1 year suspension, a bigger fine, and mandate that he undergoes counseling or something.

The guy is a horrible human being. We get it.

Do you think any fans actually think he speaks for the league? Do you think that the league's reaction hasn't been strong and swift enough to make it clear that he doesn't speak for the rest of them? Does anyone think the league is run by racists because Sterling, who is a complete laughingstock and has been for decades, made some offhanded racist comments to his girlfriend (who is black, by the way... some racist he is)? Are minorities suffering any actual, demonstrable harm due to his lunatic ramblings?

Let his sponsors abandon him. Punishment enough.

Taking away his property, or forcing him to sell, seems wrong to me.
I would guess they would let the players loose into FA if that happened. Plus, they couldn't fine him more. That was the max amount allowed.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,869
I would guess they would let the players loose into FA if that happened.
Who would? On what authority can the league void a contract that Chris Paul made with Donald Sterling?

I think the base interpretation of those contracts is going to be that Chris Paul has an obligation to make himself available to suit up for the Los Angeles Clippers for the next X amount of years. If those years is shooting hoops in a dark LA gym with only Donald Sterling watching, that's the obligation Chris Paul has to meet. He can't just go sign elsewhere because the league kicks out his team. Paul's contract is with the Clippers, not with the league.

The league is going to have to get creative to get a judge to toss out basic contract law and void those contracts, so that they can be free agents. If I was a judge, I wouldn't.

I mean, Chris Paul could always just go sign with an NBA team anyway, and the NBA could say "we are not honoring your existing contract with Don Sterling," but then there will be a huge lawsuit by Sterling seeking to hold Paul accountable for every dollar he's been paid by the Clippers, and probably suing the league for tortious interference with contract.

It would be a disaster because Sterling would be legally correct. Does Chris Paul want to take a $50 million stand on principle?

For the league to have a leg to stand on here, someone is probably going to have to invent a new precedent. And the basis for their argument is, "These contracts are void because Don Sterling is a horrible racist." Good luck.
 
Last edited:

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,869
That's another hilarious thing, by the way.... the NAACP is returning donations he's made to them. Yeah, that'll show him. Instead of using his money to prevent racism, we're gonna give it back to him.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
125,464
Who would? On what authority can the league void a contract that Chris Paul made with Donald Sterling?

I think the base interpretation of those contracts is going to be that Chris Paul has an obligation to make himself available to suit up for the Los Angeles Clippers for the next X amount of years. If those years is shooting hoops in a dark LA gym with only Donald Sterling watching, that's the obligation Chris Paul has to meet. He can't just go sign elsewhere because the league kicks out his team. Paul's contract is with the Clippers, not with the league.

The league is going to have to get creative to get a judge to toss out basic contract law and void those contracts, so that they can be free agents. If I was a judge, I wouldn't.

I mean, Chris Paul could always just go sign with an NBA team anyway, and the NBA could say "we are not honoring your existing contract with Don Sterling," but then there will be a huge lawsuit by Sterling seeking to hold Paul accountable for every dollar he's been paid by the Clippers, and probably suing the league for tortious interference with contract.

It would be a disaster because Sterling would be legally correct. Does Chris Paul want to take a $50 million stand on principle?

For the league to have a leg to stand on here, someone is probably going to have to invent a new precedent. And the basis for their argument is, "These contracts are void because Don Sterling is a horrible racist." Good luck.
The leagues has the authority to block a contract and void a current contract.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
125,464
Upon a finding of a violation of Section 1 above by the System Arbitrator, but
only following the conclusion of any appeal to the Appeals Panel, the Commissioner shall be
authorized to:

(i) impose a fine of up to $2,500,000 (50% of which shall be payable to
the NBA, and 50% of which shall be payable to the NBPA-Selected
Charitable Organization (as defined in Article VI, Section 6(a))) on
any Team found to have committed such violation for the first time;

(ii) impose a fine of up to $3,000,000 (50% of which shall be payable to
the NBA, and 50% of which shall be payable to the NBPA-Selected
Charitable Organization on any Team found to have committed such
violation for at least the second time;

(iii) direct the forfeiture of one first round draft pick;

(iv) void any Player Contract, or any Renegotiation, Extension, or
amendment of a Player Contract, between any player and any Team
when both the player (or any person or entity acting with authority on
behalf of such player) and the Team (or Team Affiliate) are found to
have committed such violation; and/or


(v) void any other transaction or agreement found to have violated Section
1 above.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,869
The leagues has the authority to block a contract and void a current contract.
They claim they do. When David Stern voided the Chris Paul to the Lakers deal, the Lakers were not going to sue because it's cutting off their nose to spite their face. At the end of the day, they are playing a game, and they've kinda implicitly agreed that the Commissioner has the final say on Rule interpretation.

If you remove the Clippers franchise from the NBA, though, Sterling has no more incentive to play by the rules. He's not going to simply lie down and accept the NBA cancelling his contracts on their say-so. It's going to go to a court.

And I'm not so sure a judge would agree that the NBA has the power to do that unilaterally.
 

Foobio

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 10, 2013
Messages
4,363
My first thought is...In 25 years no one has been able to record Jerruh dropping the N bomb?

People, get your shit together and make this happen
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,869
Upon a finding of a violation of Section 1 above by the System Arbitrator, but
only following the conclusion of any appeal to the Appeals Panel, the Commissioner shall be
authorized to:

(i) impose a fine of up to $2,500,000 (50% of which shall be payable to
the NBA, and 50% of which shall be payable to the NBPA-Selected
Charitable Organization (as defined in Article VI, Section 6(a))) on
any Team found to have committed such violation for the first time;

(ii) impose a fine of up to $3,000,000 (50% of which shall be payable to
the NBA, and 50% of which shall be payable to the NBPA-Selected
Charitable Organization on any Team found to have committed such
violation for at least the second time;

(iii) direct the forfeiture of one first round draft pick;

(iv) void any Player Contract, or any Renegotiation, Extension, or
amendment of a Player Contract, between any player and any Team
when both the player (or any person or entity acting with authority on
behalf of such player) and the Team (or Team Affiliate) are found to
have committed such violation; and/or


(v) void any other transaction or agreement found to have violated Section
1 above.
Can I get the link to that?
 

1bigfan13

Your favorite player's favorite player
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
29,006
That's another hilarious thing, by the way.... the NAACP is returning donations he's made to them. Yeah, that'll show him. Instead of using his money to prevent racism, we're gonna give it back to him.
They're a bunch of frauds and hypocrites. Sterling's been a well known racist/bigot for over a decade and they had no problem taking his money even with that track record of his.

Them returning money comes off as phony. The only reason they're doing this is to try to save face because now that Sterling has been punished the next round of hard questions are going to be aimed at individuals and institutions like the NAACP who knowingly enabled Sterling's behavior.

The NAACP could have taken a stand on this issue a long time ago instead of gripping and grinning with a guy who loathes them and everything they stand for.

David Stern is another one who will probably have to answer some tough questions. That is if he comes out of hiding.
 

Smitty

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
23,869
Never mind, I found it.

http://www.nbpa.org/sites/default/files/ARTICLE XIII.pdf

The power to void a contract that you cited there is from a violation of "Section 1" which is talking about the commissioner's power to void contracts due to violations for salary cap circumvention, not racist statements from owners.

Judge Schmidt to NBA: Motion denied.
 
Last edited:

jsmith6919

Honored Member - RIP
Joined
Aug 26, 2013
Messages
28,407
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,868
I'm with Schmitty on this as to the reaction by the NBA. They are racking up a lot of potential liabilaties by moving this drastic this quickly. The pressure to punish rapidly for public sentiment may get them in a place to where the wiggle room is gone. I hope they had excellent legal counselor because they appear to have set a lot of prescident moves over the last few days.
 

1bigfan13

Your favorite player's favorite player
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
29,006
I'm pretty sure at least 60% of Cowboy fans have had that thought cross their mind over the last 96 hours.

Damn Clippers have all the luck. :sad
 

1bigfan13

Your favorite player's favorite player
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
29,006
Never mind, I found it.

http://www.nbpa.org/sites/default/files/ARTICLE XIII.pdf

The power to void a contract that you cited there is from a violation of "Section 1" which is talking about the commissioner's power to void contracts due to violations for salary cap circumvention, not racist statements from owners.

Judge Schmidt to NBA: Motion denied.
Besides the constitution I'd like to see the paperwork that owners agree to when signing on for ownership. Surely Silver and the rest of the league attorneys have something firm in hand that will back up this punishment.

I don't think the head of the NBA would rush to judgment w/o a leg to stand on just to placate the masses. There's got to be some sort of ownership code of conduct that all owners must adhere to and I'm guessing that's what they're banking on to uphold this ruling.
 
Top Bottom