Our next potential TRO target

quote:

---

I don’t know if that’s how a TRO works but I’m sure we can find a judge who will play ball.

---

The SEC filed in Alabama precisely to lock down forum selection and avoid local home-cooking. You don't typically fight a pending federal lawsuit with a state court gag order.

You’re correct regarding LSU being an arm of the state but perhaps misapplied how federal court venue and removal jurisdiction technically work in a pre-emptive federal suit.

Being an arm of the state gives LSU 11th Amendment sovereign immunity defense arguments, but it doesn't automatically force a federal case into a Louisiana federal court. Venue in federal court is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1391, which looks at where the defendants reside or where a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred. Because SEC HQ is in Birmingham, the SEC filed there claiming the alleged injury to the conference happens in Alabama. Additionally, a federal court in Alabama could establish jurisdiction over LSU: the SEC relies on LSU’s "continuous and systematic governance activities" within the conference; the SEC argues that because LSU voluntarily participates in conference administration (e.g., attending SEC meetings, voting on bylaws, and competing in conference events hosted or governed out of Birmingham), the university has sufficient "minimum contacts" with Alabama federal court related directly to the dispute over its "Professionalism Rules." LSU can (and will) file a Motion to Transfer Venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), but that is a discretionary balancing test by the judge based on convenience and justice—it isn't an automatic right simply because LSU is a state institution; that motion should be granted, though, because the litigation in state court is further along than federal courts and the majority of whatever evidence would be found in Louisiana.

The SEC didn't go to federal court to appeal a state district judge's ruling. Instead, they filed a direct, original federal action in Alabama alleging federal constitutional issues under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (specifically using Ex parte Young to sue LSU officials in their official capacities). Because the SEC is asserting a direct federal question, it's an independent original lawsuit, not an impermissible appeal of a state decision (which would otherwise trigger the Rooker-Feldman doctrine).

While federal courts generally defer to state law on state contract/bylaw matters, federal courts have a constitutional mandate to hear federal constitutional claims brought before them. If there are parallel state court proceedings, of which there are, federal courts generally continue unless very narrow abstention doctrines apply.

LSU certainly has strong venue transfer arguments under § 1404(a) and sovereign immunity defenses under Pennhurst, but the SEC filing in Birmingham was a calculated preemptive strike precisely to establish federal jurisdiction on their home turf first.

I explained this in a post on the SEC Rant. Sankey’s Desperate Hail Mary: Why the SEC’s Federal Lawsuit Against LSU is Total Nonsense

I agree with you about the ultimate outcome and the SEC’s nonsensical approach to penalize LSU for having not broken any rules. LSU didn’t roster any players who participated in any NFL minicamps or what have you unlike Texas. The procedural aspects of cases moving through state and federal courts are more nuanced.