Post by Southern Pirate on Sept 19, 2009 20:02:33 GMT -7
DRUG TESTING
Ruling against NFL could affect other sports
Michael S. Schmidt, New York Times
Saturday, September 19, 2009
A federal court ruling in Minneapolis has jeopardized the NFL's ability to enforce its drug-testing program and raised significant doubts about the programs of other professional sports in the United States.
The ruling revealed a new door for athletes to challenge their doping suspensions: players in the NFL, Major League Baseball, the NBA and NHL may now turn to state courts for relief, hampering the leagues' abilities to discipline players. The other leagues and the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, which oversees the testing of Olympians, were so concerned about these prospects that they filed friend-of-the-court briefs supporting the NFL's position.
"This is the most significant legal challenge we have ever seen to the collectively bargained drug-testing programs in this country," Travis Tygart, the chief of USADA, said.
A three-judge panel from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Minneapolis last week upheld a lower court ruling that prohibited the NFL from suspending two players for the Minnesota Vikings who violated the league's anti-doping policy, saying they could contest their suspensions in state court. The ruling was a victory for the players because Minnesota state laws - and laws in about half of all states - are considered worker-friendly and say that an employee cannot be penalized for an initial positive drug test.
"Why should a football player not have the same rights that a person in Minnesota has?" said Mark S. Levinstein, a lawyer in Washington for the firm Williams & Connolly who has represented dozens of professional athletes, including Lance Armstrong. "The idea that the NFL is more important than the views of state legislators is ridiculous."
Scott Boras, an agent for many of the top players in baseball, said an adherence to state workplace laws would reshape the collective bargaining process, which includes the creation of doping policies. "The parties will now have to consider the limitation of employment rights," he said.
The two Vikings players initially filed suit in Minnesota state court alleging that the suspensions violated the state's Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act and the Consumable Products Act.
The sports leagues could also try to lobby Congress to pass legislation that would state that their collective bargaining agreements trump state laws. But turning to Congress would be difficult and presents risks because Congress could compel them to adopt more rigorous anti-doping programs.
sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/09/19/SP7419PH05.DTL
Ruling against NFL could affect other sports
Michael S. Schmidt, New York Times
Saturday, September 19, 2009
A federal court ruling in Minneapolis has jeopardized the NFL's ability to enforce its drug-testing program and raised significant doubts about the programs of other professional sports in the United States.
The ruling revealed a new door for athletes to challenge their doping suspensions: players in the NFL, Major League Baseball, the NBA and NHL may now turn to state courts for relief, hampering the leagues' abilities to discipline players. The other leagues and the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, which oversees the testing of Olympians, were so concerned about these prospects that they filed friend-of-the-court briefs supporting the NFL's position.
"This is the most significant legal challenge we have ever seen to the collectively bargained drug-testing programs in this country," Travis Tygart, the chief of USADA, said.
A three-judge panel from the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Minneapolis last week upheld a lower court ruling that prohibited the NFL from suspending two players for the Minnesota Vikings who violated the league's anti-doping policy, saying they could contest their suspensions in state court. The ruling was a victory for the players because Minnesota state laws - and laws in about half of all states - are considered worker-friendly and say that an employee cannot be penalized for an initial positive drug test.
"Why should a football player not have the same rights that a person in Minnesota has?" said Mark S. Levinstein, a lawyer in Washington for the firm Williams & Connolly who has represented dozens of professional athletes, including Lance Armstrong. "The idea that the NFL is more important than the views of state legislators is ridiculous."
Scott Boras, an agent for many of the top players in baseball, said an adherence to state workplace laws would reshape the collective bargaining process, which includes the creation of doping policies. "The parties will now have to consider the limitation of employment rights," he said.
The two Vikings players initially filed suit in Minnesota state court alleging that the suspensions violated the state's Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act and the Consumable Products Act.
The sports leagues could also try to lobby Congress to pass legislation that would state that their collective bargaining agreements trump state laws. But turning to Congress would be difficult and presents risks because Congress could compel them to adopt more rigorous anti-doping programs.
sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/09/19/SP7419PH05.DTL