NBA’s Decision Against Clippers’ Owner: Is It Legal?
Days after a recording of Los Angeles Clippers’ owner Donald Sterling making racially insensitive comments went public, NBA Commissioner Adam Silver responded. In a big way.
On Tuesday, Mr. Silver announced that Mr. Sterling would be banned for life and fined $2.5 million for making racist comments. The commissioner also said he would urge the league’s board of governors to force the team’s sale.
Were Mr. Silver’s moves legal?
Let’s start with the fine and life suspension. Lawyers and legal experts generally seem to think that on these two moves, Mr. Silver was on sound legal footing.
The NBA’s constitution – a collection of bylaws governing the operation of the league and agreed to by the league’s 30 team owners – grants the NBA’s commissioner wide latitude to punish behavior deemed “prejudicial” or “detrimental” to the league, according to Gabe Feldman, director of the sports-law program at Tulane University.
The constitution specifically allows for fines and indefinite suspensions. “It’s a broad power that Adam Silver has, and it’s given to him explicitly by Sterling and the other 29 owners,” said Mr. Feldman.
Under the terms of the NBA’s constitution, Mr. Silver’s decision has the effect of a binding arbitration decision and is enforceable in court, according to Jeffrey Kessler, a prominent sports lawyer with Winston & Strawn LLP in New York.
Overturning it could be difficult, said Mr. Kessler, as arbitrations are often only reversed when a losing party can point to fraud or a serious conflict of interest on the part of an arbitrator.
Challenging the lifetime ban and the fine, partly for these reasons, is going to be hard, according to Mr. Kessler. “He has a history of being very litigious so I’d expect a lawsuit,” said Mr. Kessler. “But I don’t think any lawsuit would have much merit.”
A lawyer for Mr. Sterling declined to comment on Tuesday.
Mr. Silver on Tuesday indicated he was moving forward with plans to force Mr. Sterling to sell the Clippers.
Under the NBA constitution, such a move would require the support of at least three-quarters of the league’s owners. But whether the owners would have grounds to oust Mr. Sterling from the league under the NBA constitution is a more difficult question, said Howard Wasserman, a sports-law expert at Florida International University.
Many of the behaviors that constitute a justification for a forced sale involve financial issues, like failing to make payments on time or gambling on NBA games.
A provision of the constitution allows for “the interest of any owner” to be terminated if he “wilfully violates” any other provisions of the constitution.
But Mr. Wasserman said it was unclear if “this sort of abhorrent personal behavior” is grounds for removing an owner. “It largely depends on how the other owners think about that question,” he said. “The assumption, I think, is that the termination power is reserved for someone who is mismanaging the team, not paying bills, that kind of thing.”
