Getty Images
Despite the failed efforts of the NFL Players Association to challenge the discipline imposed by the NFL on Tom Brady and Ezekiel Elliott in court, the current effort to impose discipline on Deshaun Watson could also be challenged.
Brady initially won, before a three-judge appeals court (by a 2-1 vote) found that Commissioner Roger Goodell acted properly within his collectively negotiated rights. Elliott also won initially.
At the end of the day, eight judges totaled the Brady and Elliott cases. They split, 4-4, over whether Goodell or the players should prevail.
In this situation, if the NFLPA and / or Watson oppose the end result, another effort could be made to challenge the case in court. The question is whether Watson’s team could file the case in a favorable forum before the league could file a lawsuit of its own in a New York federal court, to ask for a statement that the ruling is legally defensible.
If the case goes to federal court in New York, the decision on the Brady appeals case becomes directly relevant to Watson. The precedent potentially links any decision. (Again, and as we all learned five days ago, the precedent is only as binding as the judges decide it should be).
One way for judges to avoid a supposedly binding precedent is to “distinguish” the facts of the current situation from the facts of the previous one. The facts of the Watson case can potentially be distinguished based only on the fact that the procedure for imposing discipline and appealing the decision has changed.
A key difference comes from the fact that the findings made by Judge Sue L. Robinson will “be binding” on the parties during the appeal process. If Judge Robinson draws his written conclusions and conclusions in a certain way, it could be very difficult for Goodell to simply thank him for his service and apply the punishment that the league office (controlled by Goodell) wanted in the first place. place.
Thus, while the leak on Tuesday night of an alleged will of the league not to appeal the decision if it reaches a six- or eight-match suspension could be aimed at preventing the judge Robinson make an unappealable decision that no discipline should be sanctioned. imposed, it is also possible for the league to realize that overturning its decision to impose six or eight games without a good reason to do so is tantamount to jumping with both feet into a bear trap of litigation.