Ruling May Blunt Sports’ Anti-Doping Plans
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT
NYT
A federal court ruling in Minnesota that said state laws can override the National Football League’s collective-bargaining agreement has jeopardized the league’s ability to enforce its own drug-testing program and raised significant doubts about the programs of other professional sports in the United States.
The ruling opened a door for athletes to challenge their doping suspensions: players in the N.F.L., Major League Baseball, the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League may now turn to state courts for relief and hamper the leagues’ abilities to discipline players. The other leagues and the United States Anti-Doping Agency, which oversees the testing of Olympic athletes, were so concerned about these prospects that they filed a friend-of-the-court brief in July supporting the N.F.L.’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 the United States Anti-Doping Agency, said.
A three-judge panel from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, in Minneapolis, last week upheld a lower court ruling that prohibited the N.F.L. 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.
(More here.)
NYT
A federal court ruling in Minnesota that said state laws can override the National Football League’s collective-bargaining agreement has jeopardized the league’s ability to enforce its own drug-testing program and raised significant doubts about the programs of other professional sports in the United States.
The ruling opened a door for athletes to challenge their doping suspensions: players in the N.F.L., Major League Baseball, the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League may now turn to state courts for relief and hamper the leagues’ abilities to discipline players. The other leagues and the United States Anti-Doping Agency, which oversees the testing of Olympic athletes, were so concerned about these prospects that they filed a friend-of-the-court brief in July supporting the N.F.L.’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 the United States Anti-Doping Agency, said.
A three-judge panel from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, in Minneapolis, last week upheld a lower court ruling that prohibited the N.F.L. 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.
(More here.)
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home