- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: You can forget it.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:50 pm to DeathByTossDive226
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:50 pm to DeathByTossDive226
They named a plaintiff that has no real legal existence. Very doubtful an unincorporated association can sue or be sued. Likely the judge's first reaction. It is tax exempt because federal tax law does not require personhood for 501(c)(3)/170(c)(2) exemption.
It was a collection of implied but unnamed states and universities. That might be sufficient to get beyond a motion to dismiss for failure to name a plaintiff; but, it is very doubtful the State of Florida or any state has First Amendment rights. That notion strikes me as ludicrous. The same is true of any private exempt school. The Supreme Court in Hobby Lobby allowed shareholder first amendment rights to be asserted by a "close corporation" (very antiquated language by Alito).
I would not conclude the suit is frivolous, but it is not serious. The amended petition citing Kiffin's joke, the AG's geaux tigers and the dancing is silly. I'm embarrassed for the lawyers who filed it. They have decent reputations, but this is disconcerting.
It was a collection of implied but unnamed states and universities. That might be sufficient to get beyond a motion to dismiss for failure to name a plaintiff; but, it is very doubtful the State of Florida or any state has First Amendment rights. That notion strikes me as ludicrous. The same is true of any private exempt school. The Supreme Court in Hobby Lobby allowed shareholder first amendment rights to be asserted by a "close corporation" (very antiquated language by Alito).
I would not conclude the suit is frivolous, but it is not serious. The amended petition citing Kiffin's joke, the AG's geaux tigers and the dancing is silly. I'm embarrassed for the lawyers who filed it. They have decent reputations, but this is disconcerting.
0
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:50 pm to DeathByTossDive226
(no message)
This post was edited on 9/9/26 at 5:53 pm
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:50 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:51 pm to lsusteve1
quote:
LSU knows those kids are gonna sue and win - it wasn’t worth it to roster them
What do these things have to do with each other?
Was LSU trying to roster them to get them paid or contribute to LSU football?
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:51 pm to Pedropatterstine
I couldn’t care less if LSU did not pursue damages. The SEC has seriously damaged its own image with all of this bluster.
But I would be seriously “possed” off if LSU allowed the SEC to impose any type of penalty on LSU or Kiffen for breaking no rules at all.
Sankey and his cohorts have made their bed, let them sleep in it.
But I would be seriously “possed” off if LSU allowed the SEC to impose any type of penalty on LSU or Kiffen for breaking no rules at all.
Sankey and his cohorts have made their bed, let them sleep in it.
This post was edited on 9/9/26 at 5:58 pm
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Was LSU trying to roster them to get them paid or contribute to LSU football?
Initially to play them and get paid
Once it all blew up, that was not gonna happen
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:52 pm to DeathByTossDive226
(no message)
This post was edited on 9/9/26 at 5:55 pm
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:52 pm to DeathByTossDive226
quote:
LSU would prefer not to have to resort to lawfare against the SEC and its members.
The SEC always had the power and LSU could never roster those 2 players without fear of future litigation creating a path to punishment.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:52 pm to Pedropatterstine
quote:
What posses me off is that LSU has a real case for damages against the sec. They intentionally and recklessly went after LSU and did cause brand damage.
I’m with you. But part of me wonders if our brand didn’t get stronger… I mean we are about to layeth the smacketh down on the rest of the SEC
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:54 pm to jacquespene8
quote:
I’m with you. But part of me wonders if our brand didn’t get stronger…
This. It's why I'm cool letting the players get their pound of flesh while LSU continues to act as if all of this spazzing and bluster is beneath them.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 5:58 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The SEC always had the power and LSU could never roster those 2 players without fear of future litigation creating a path to punishment.
Rule making authority of a private entity is not a god gavel. There’s a lot of context here that matters, but you know that already.
LSU doesn’t want to take the conference to court. That doesn’t mean LSU fears a loss in court.
The SEC’s suit is unserious and vulnerable on more levels than I even care to dig into. You can see this even just superficially.
Watch how quick lawyers get involved if they attempt to sanction tomorrow.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 6:00 pm to DeathByTossDive226
quote:
Rule making authority of a private entity is not a god gavel.
The only thing potentially shielding LSU would be a state court TRO that hasn't even been appealed yet, and the SEC has infinite opportunities elsewhere to file suit. All it takes is one loss by LSU and they'd be fricked.
quote:
Watch how quick lawyers get involved if they attempt to sanction tomorrow.
I imagine if there will be any sanctions, LSU agreed to them as part of the settlement. We gave up and then everything got lighter and the SEC threats were taken off the table. I doubt we'd have agreed to that if we were getting hammered by significant sanctions.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 6:02 pm to DeathByTossDive226
quote:Hey IDIOT!
This goes out to all the chicken littles and Debbie downers who are still finding things to worry about.
Wake up!
This is not settled.
The woman running this show is an emotional UTenn Chancellor who has no clue nor interest in sports innovation, or apparently in the law.
She wants to go nuclear.
She is pushing to go nuclear.
She is lobbying to go nuclear.
Her FEELINGS are hurt.
She is the "SEC stakeholder" source for every reporter out there.
She was the source for Finebaum and Dellenger claims that if this came to a vote, "LSU would be kicked out of the SEC."
She needs to be shown her place.
She is STILL pushing for some sort of punishment doled out to LSU!!
This bitch needs to be slapped down by the courts and then removed from her position.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 6:06 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:The SEC threats were taken off the table when Axon refused to stay the BR court
the SEC threats were taken off the table
Posted on 9/9/26 at 6:07 pm to LSUneaux
You can add the chambliss debacle and the Mississippi judge ruling. He was ruled ineligible and the judge said no it’s ok. Sec - crickets.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 6:07 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SlowFlowPro
quote:
LSU
quote:GFY
We
Posted on 9/9/26 at 6:12 pm to icecreamsnowball
quote:
GFY
I have 3 degrees from LSU including graduating Summa Cum Laude for one of them
Posted on 9/9/26 at 6:16 pm to DeathByTossDive226
Remember Lane and LSU fought for players. Do not think that won’t be used on the recruiting trail.
Lane also has likely got his team completely circle up and ready to fight as a unit. That halftime speech was fire!
Lane also has likely got his team completely circle up and ready to fight as a unit. That halftime speech was fire!
Posted on 9/9/26 at 6:27 pm to SlowFlowPro
Don’t fall for the psychosis this guy has. It’s an easy playbook. Hitting refresh like a day trader to claim he’s smarter. The addiction to attention is real
Posted on 9/9/26 at 6:29 pm to SlowFlowPro
Dude, why don’t you shut up?
You’re no friend of LSU
You’re no friend of LSU
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News