AFL-CIO files amicus brief in support of Tom Brady

[RobertWeathers]

Well that and I think the main Amicus discussion took place in the AFL CIO thread. But you're right. I had no idea who Feinberg was or how relevant his brief seems to be.

I think that is where most people are with Feinberg. I knew about him from the 9/11 stuff but did some reading on him to better appreciate the weight of his brief..

 

[turkeyneck]

correct me if iam wrong , but the judges dont have to read a single amicus brief to make their decision , yes ?

Well, we know that Chin, at least, operates that way.

 

[Mack Herron]

Well, we know that Chin, at least, operates that way.

Yes, but that was before the AFL-CIO, a preeminent arbitrator, and dozens of scientists (among others) called BS. The spotlight is on him now. Perhaps it is time for a re-think.

 

[Galeb]

"Got to them"? You have proof of that or you simply want to believe that?
I'm as skeptical of the process as anyone here, however, we were not in the court for this. The case in the way it was presented by team Brady may have weakened itself (I think there is consensus they certainly didn't pull out some of their biggest guns -- and maybe played it 'safe'). I just don't think you can expect a judge to see things the way "we" do or should when the judges are not seeing anything outside of what team Brady provided them.

There's a distinct possibility team Brady made a mistake on which lawyer headed up the legal showdown. It's unfortunate but reality is that money can buy better "justice" because it can buy a better lawyer more skilled in the specifics of an individual case. And in this instance I think it is quite possible Brady should have had a different lawyer (which seems to have been rectified now). Quite possibly if the new head lawyer was present for the case that was just lost it wouldn't have been lost.

No, I don't have proof, but that was an excellent question.

Berman's ruling was so bullet proof that it didn't matter what the NFLPA did. The judges had access to everything that Berman did. Not only that, proof of Clement lying to the court was also submitted. It's fine if people want to believe that two seasoned federal judges could genuinely strike down every one of Berman's rulings, but IMO, that is extremely naive. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[turkeyneck]

Yes, but that was before the AFL-CIO, a preeminent arbitrator, and dozens of scientists (among others) called BS. The spotlight is on him now. Perhaps it is time for a re-think.

There's a touch of irony in Chin's predicament. Hopefully, he's more of a stand up guy than Goodell and can back out gracefully rather than double down on ignorance.

 

[VectorPrime]

No one got to Chin or Parker good Christ. Chin mailed it in and Parker is vehemently anti-labor its a simple as that.

 

[RobertWeathers]

There's a touch of irony in Chin's predicament. Hopefully, he's more of a stand up guy than Goodell and can back out gracefully rather than double down on ignorance.

The problem with judges at this level is that they double down on stubbornness and sticking to ideological beliefs....which is human.

There isn't a snowball's chance in hell Chin reverses his opinion. No. Way.

 

[Galeb]

Never attribute to malice that which can easily be explained by stupidity or laziness.

In a system where who you know is as important/more important than what you do, it's possible the stupid does rise in the ranks. It's not the complete moron level of stupid, but the type of stupid who does have the smarts to fool other people into thinking he's competent. Hell, Roger Goodell himself fits into this category. Happens in other C-suite arenas too.

Most mistakes are made due to laziness and apathy. Even the smartest people will make mistakes if they don't put the effort in when it's something they don't care about. Justice Chin's questions just reeked pure laziness and nothing more. Was he actually pissed that this case got to him, as opposed to the other 3 federal judges who showed actual interest even if they thought it was silly for it to be in court? Certainly possible - pissed that he had to deal with it so he didn't do his homework like he does for his other cases. Who knows?

As for Justice Parker? What's interesting is that he himself (in the oral arguments) actually said that the normal standard of deference given to arbitrators doesn't necessarily hold when the arbitrator isn't a neutral party. He clearly spent the time on the case. So why did he rule the way he did? I suspect ultimately it's because as a generally pro-business guy, he thinks the NFLPA knew or should have known what they were getting themselves into with Goodell as arbitrator, and doesn't feel the need to protect powerful unions from making stupid decisions, and that the union therefore needs to show real strong evidence of bias which he didn't think they did.

So because the NFLPA should have known better, a non-impartial arbitrator can **** all over the law of shop? I disagree.

How many highly scrutinized gigs did Goodell have before being elected commissioner by a bunch of petty, greedy brats? That's not comparable to the road it takes to become a federal judge. Every ruling a judge makes becomes public record. Sure, politicians and the like can pull of such a con, but the same doesn't hold true for Federal judges. You are free to apply Hanlon's Razor to Federal Judges, but I find the idea absurd.

No matter how hard I tried, I couldn't imagine a Federal Judge not spending much time in crafting his comments on a corrupt decision. If you don't think a judge would use AT LEAST as much care in crafting a corrupt decision as a just one...

It's also worth noting that the Hanlon's Razor argument is in direct conflict with your points on the time and effort Parker put into it.

 

[Tony2046]

The problem with judges at this level is that they double down on stubbornness and sticking to ideological beliefs....which is human.

There isn't a snowball's chance in hell Chin reverses his opinion. No. Way.

Not sure either way but I believe that he has an out. He can say that he was mislead by the NFL's mischaracterized statements?

 

[Galeb]

No one got to Chin or Parker good Christ. Chin mailed it in and Parker is vehemently anti-labor its a simple as that.

Excellent argument. I stand corrected.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Not sure either way but I believe that he has an out. He can say that he was mislead by the NFL's mischaracterized statements?

I dunna know. Saying that he was mislead when there were briefs filed calling out Clement misstating the court's record is on him. In addition Kessler and Johnson also filed statements challenging the NFL's findings.

I think its a simple cases that Chin didn't dig hard enough and mailed in his opinion.

 

[Galeb]

I dunna know. Saying that he was mislead when there were briefs filed calling out Clement misstating the court's record is on him. In addition Kessler and Johnson also filed statements challenging the NFL's findings.

I think its a simple cases that Chin didn't dig hard enough and mailed in his opinion.

Do you really think a judge would mail it in on such a high profile case, overturning such a well crafted, logical and sound ruling by another highly respected judge? It's not like Berman ruled on a single point. Each of his points was rock solid with legal precedent. I suppose it's not as bad as being corrupt, but it seems highly unlikely.

 

[borisman]

Either @WallachLegal or @IanPGunn points out that if CA2 orders the NFL to reply to the NFLPA petition, then that apparently reopens the amicus submission door. So expect to see pro-NFL filings then.

THIS I cannot wait to see. And it will happen so...get your popcorn ready.

 

[DaBruinz]

Kenneth Feinberg's brief is as important as the AFL-CIO. Both are important. The thread with Feinberg's brief has only 9 responses. I'm wondering if it is because people haven't read it. It's devastating for Goodell.

Feinberg, the most highly respected arbitrator in the United States, accuses Goodell of unilaterally changing the CBL during an arbitration hearing, not by negotiating at the bargaining table.

http://cbsboston.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/feinberg.pdf

It's because many people were talking about it in this thread prior to the other thread being started.

 

[DaBruinz]

Either @WallachLegal or @IanPGunn points out that if CA2 orders the NFL to reply to the NFLPA petition, then that apparently reopens the amicus submission door. So expect to see pro-NFL filings then.

I'll be honest. I don't know how we could see ANY pro-NFL Amicus filings because the process was so flawed and unfair..

 

[Froob]

I dunna know. Saying that he was mislead when there were briefs filed calling out Clement misstating the court's record is on him. In addition Kessler and Johnson also filed statements challenging the NFL's findings.

I think its a simple cases that Chin didn't dig hard enough and mailed in his opinion.

Did this guy hire him?

 

[VectorPrime]

Excellent argument. I stand corrected.

You're the one advocating the conspiracy theory. The burden of proof is on YOU.

 

[Galeb]

You're the one advocating the conspiracy theory. The burden of proof is on YOU.

There was a time when such ideas could accurately be called conspiracy theories, but our government has reached such a high level of corruption that such things are common place. I could be wrong, and there could be some other explanation of how two seasoned judges made such glaringly bad rulings... it's just that no one has offered a scenario even close to as likely as corruption. Claiming a Federal judge mailed in his decision on an appeal of a highly respected judge's rock solid ruling on a very high profile case is a helluva lot less likely than corruption.

If you believe there is a branch of our government that isn't deeply corrupted, I have a slightly used bridge that you might be interested in.

 

[XLIX]

There was a time when such ideas could accurately be called conspiracy theories, but our government has reached such a high level of corruption that such things are common place. I could be wrong, and there could be some other explanation of how two seasoned judges made such glaringly bad rulings... it's just that no one has offered a scenario even close to as likely as corruption. Claiming a Federal judge mailed in his decision on an appeal of a highly respected judge's rock solid ruling on a very high profile case is a helluva lot less likely than corruption.

So a judge being a little lazy is less believable than the notion that the judge and the league violated federal law with the jailable offense of offering and accepting a bribe for a certain verdict? Not to mention this means you believe that the stooges at the NFL pull this off, when it actually takes a certain level of competency.....

Yeah, gotta disagree there.

 

[Galeb]

So a judge being a little lazy is less believable than the notion that the judge and the league violated federal law with the jailable offense of offering and accepting a bribe for a certain verdict? Not to mention this means you believe that the stooges at the NFL pull this off, when it actually takes a certain level of competency.....

Yeah, gotta disagree there.

I think some judges may be lazy in low profile cases that aren't an appeal of a highly respected judge. It's certainly possible in this case, but it's a lot less likely than corruption.

It's unlikely that it was a bribe that turned the judges. You can underestimate the influence of Roger, a NY senator's son and a bunch of billionaires if you want, but competency was never a requirement of influence. Wealth and power are. I appreciate your disagreement as it strengthens my argument.

The wealthy disregard law all the time. You of all people should know this.