RealGM

My purpose for this post is to learn more about our league's contractual bylaws and the process the NBA owners will go through to remove Mr Sterling as a majority team owner and the legal remedies both parties might have against one another.....
This post is not intented to start a debate about race. The media seems to already be bombarding our homes with negative interviews,talk shows, tweets and facebook posts. The bottom line is that racial slurs happen ever day and, as proven from MJ's own admission, can come from anyone at anytime. That being said,I would like you to considerthefollowing:
1. Say 3/4 of the owners vote in favor of Commissoner Silver's motion to band Sterling from the Association due to recorded remarks given to the NBA during a private discussion between himself and ex girl friend. Can they actually force him to sell the team?? Considering that he bought the team in the early 80's for 12 million..Now market value is worth between 500-900 milliom. He should have his pick of 10 our more parties interested in the Clippers.The Bucks had 9 parties interested and sold for 100 million over market? Even though Donald is 80+,stubborn as hell, and lives for a good lawsuit, what can the league do if he transfers ownership to his wife or son in law for $1. Can his wife then go and fire the league appointed CEO,elect herself and Donald still run the show?
2. Just what can the NBA do to force a sale of a sportsteam ? Does Sterling have the right treat the Clippers as his property ? What in the NBA league contract indicates the league can disolve his investment for a racial comment turned into them by a ex girlfriend.If there is such a clause in the contract, this lawsuit will set a precedent for all 30 owners no matter what their race. Ex girl friends will be coming out all over the place forcing owners to liquidate on the spot.
3. Finnally , Is there a specific part of the NBA'owner agreement that says at any time,Sterling, can be turned away from attending any NBA Game? Really?
Seeing part of Anderson Cooper's interview, its obvious Mr Sterling is very brash old fart that should have sold the Clippers some time ago..Unfortunately with the offseason coming up quickly,in my opinion he will be lawyering up for a battle in the courtroom If only he knew..It would be best for all of us and the Clippers if he would sell the team now to a stranger who loves the game as a game and not as a distraction.

The League has a constitution. Language in the constitution allows them to force a sale based on all the issues you touched on. Family member's ownership rights are also forfeited under said constitution.

Here's a page of links to articles for further reading: https://www.google.com/search?q=nba+con ... 3&ie=UTF-8

Sterling has long been tabbed a racist for his business practices. Everyone has waited for a smoking gun to get rid of him. It finally came. The team will sell for over $1 Billion. He's disgusting, but there's a reason he got rich.

The wife is the bigger problem. She believes she is not culpable for Donald's behavior over the last year as they are estranged, and that therefore the league is sexist if if does not recognize her ownership role. BS on that. She has seen first hand for decades the racist way Donald handled his business affairs. For her to plead innocent is the height of hypocrisy.

Market forces will be brought to bear. LAC, and possibly other, players will strike if a Sterling still owns the team in the fall. Sponsors walked and will continue to if a Sterling owns. Attendance will crater. Sell the team for $1 Billion or watch it implode from its rotten foundation. Which would you do?

Thanks Snidely for your link. I reviewed it along with your comments. I agree that the best thing is for the Sterlings to sell the team and then fight in out themselves in Divorce court rather than vus the NBA.
What concerns me is that I 'm afraid Donald is so stubborn he will let the Clipper organization and himself self emplode first.. rather than sell it for some obscene $ figure.
If the Sterlings Truly love the Clippers and the game they should SELL NOW!!!

I don't care how crazy or vile a persons opinions are, a man should have the right to say what ever he wants in his own house. There will always be a double standard with black people in that only white people are racist and should get stoned. They'll never go after their own.

Rajaness wrote:I don't care how crazy or vile a persons opinions are, a man should have the right to say what ever he wants in his own house. There will always be a double standard with black people in that only white people are racist and should get stoned. They'll never go after their own.

Welcome to the board!

Rajaness wrote:I don't care how crazy or vile a persons opinions are, a man should have the right to say what ever he wants in his own house. There will always be a double standard with black people in that only white people are racist and should get stoned. They'll never go after their own.

Yeah...I would've stopped with that first sentence if I were you.

Rajaness wrote:I don't care how crazy or vile a persons opinions are, a man should have the right to say what ever he wants in his own house.

I agree on the right to privacy. However, as Adam Silver eloquently put it:

"Whether or not these remarks were initially shared in private, they are now public, and they represent his views.”

His recent statements are simply the catalysts that have finally allowed the league to move against a notorious bigot.

n February 2003, the Housing Rights Center of Los Angeles filed a housing discrimination case against Sterling on behalf of 18 tenants. The lawsuit featured several racist statements allegedly made by Sterling to employees, such as that "black people smell and attract vermin" and "hispanics just smoke and hang around the building" as well as Sterling's alleged intent to rent only to Korean tenants because "they will pay the rent and live in whatever conditions I give them." Part of the HRC case's resolution included U.S. District Judge Dale Fischer awarding the plaintiffs' attorney $4.9 million in attorneys fees. While the final terms for the plaintiffs were confidential, the judge said the fees were justified as the settlement obtained by the plaintiffs against Sterling was one of the largest of its kind and the public benefit terms were significant and wide-ranging.

In 2006, the U.S. Department of Justice then sued Sterling for housing discrimination for using race as a factor in filling some of his apartment buildings. The suit charged that Sterling refused to rent to non-Koreans in the Koreatown neighborhood and to African Americans in Beverly Hills.[69] In November 2009, ESPN reported that Sterling agreed to pay a fine of $2.7 million to settle claims brought by the Justice Department and Davin Day of Newport Beach[citation needed] that Sterling engaged in discriminatory rental practices against Hispanics, blacks, and families with children.

The NBA's Constitution gives the league broad latitude to pursue penalties against Sterling. This article contains a link to the NBA Constitution. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2045 ... nstitution. That Constitution is the basis under which his ownership rights are being scrutinized.

Your privacy rights argument might hold in a court of U.S. law. That remains to be seen. But, under the statutes of the NBA Constitution, and in the court of public opinion, Donald Sterling, deservedly, is Toast.

Yeah, anyone that thinks Sterling is getting thrown under the bus simply for the recent comments he's made do not know his history. His comments being made public were the smoking gun the league has been waiting for to get rid of him. He is a POS and the league will be better off without him.

By fighting the NBA, suing the NBA and refusing to pay his fine, I think he is merely providing the reason for every owner to vote him out publicly. This helps any of the other owners who were hesitant on kicking him out for fear of any slippery slope concerns. This may be entertaining to watch. If it goes all the way to court and Sterling testifies, the cross examination will be must watch TV

So tired of Sterling apologists trying to compare mj to him. MJ was 15 years when he felt that anger. In 1992 he did a reflective interview with playboy speaking about it. Now 2014, some writer decides to write an unauthorized biography about Jordan and includes this story in his book and I see these crazy headlines about Jordan being racist. These are mj's actual quotes.

http://longform.org/stories/playboy-int ... ael-jordan

Playboy: When was the first time you ever had to deal with racism?

Jordan: When I threw a soda at a girl for calling me a ****. It was when Roots was on television.

Playboy: How old were you?

Jordan: I was fifteen. It was a very tough year. I was really rebelling. I considered myself a racist at that time. Basically, I was against all white people.

Playboy: Why?

Jordan: It was hundreds of years of pain that they put us through, and for the first time, I saw it from watching Roots. I was very ignorant about it initially, but I really opened my eyes about my ancestors and the things that they had to deal with.

Playboy: How long did it take you to get over that?

Jordan: A whole year. The education came from my parents. You have to be able to say, OK, that happened back then. Now let’s take it from here and see what happens. It would be very easy to hate people for the rest of your life, and some people have done that. You’ve got to deal with what’s happening now and try to make things better.