Jump to content

Well, It looks like GB will open camp on time


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

I think the date you open camp is up to the team. Everyone has always opened mandatory camps by their own volition.  

Not true they have timeframes given by the league to mesh with the CBA. Also the league won’t let GB start training camp if the season is going to be delayed

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

Wisconsin  Supreme court overturns  stay at home order. I wonder if this will become a trend across the country. 

Didnt they say if one can't open, no one will? 

So how could it work the other way around? 

Im doubting if a few states allow teams in those states to practice they would be allowed by the NFL to get a jump on the rest of the league

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, More Cowbell said:

I think the date you open camp is up to the team. Everyone has always opened mandatory camps by their own volition.  

Goodell is on record as saying there will be competitive advantage for any team. If one team doesn't have access than no team will have access.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something to think about.  Owners, GM's and CEO's won't expose parts of their staff that are extremely vulnerable to the virus.  Cuban has already told the NBA to go screw for just that reason.  Don't expect owners who've worked with people all their lives to just expose them to things just for a cash grab.  It won't be till they are tested within the confines of what is advised by national medical authorities.  This is going to be tricky

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

Would think this gets challenged and heads to SCOTUS in the fall, which helps no one. 

Not necessarily true. Until it gets reversed, other state courts can (obviously don't have to) rely on this ruling as  precedent on this issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, pdxgreen said:

Something to think about.  Owners, GM's and CEO's won't expose parts of their staff that are extremely vulnerable to the virus.  Cuban has already told the NBA to go screw for just that reason.  Don't expect owners who've worked with people all their lives to just expose them to things just for a cash grab.  It won't be till they are tested within the confines of what is advised by national medical authorities.  This is going to be tricky

I look forward to them still paying all these people they care so deeply about . . .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

Would think this gets challenged and heads to SCOTUS in the fall, which helps no one. 

How does a state law get challenged in federal court? The state supreme court is the court of last resort for state law.

State law can only be challenged at SCOTUS for violating the US constitution. Nothing in the US constitution gives a state governor any powers. They come from the state constitution, and the state supreme court is the last arbiter of state law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, kevinc855 said:

Goodell said they need to all open at once, so no GB wont be opening till everyone gets the all clear. 

I don't think Goodell said that they all have to open at their usual facilities. Florida is already advertising for teams to move their training camps to Florida if their state won't allow them to open. Once there is a facility available for every team, Goodell may allow opening training camp.

Just saying...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, OCCH23 said:

I look forward to them still paying all these people they care so deeply about . . .

 

That may be part of the reason.  Unless they can get everybody to sign papers that say, "I know exactly what I am getting into and agree that I have been given proper medical instructions on the risk... yadadada."  The owners may not want to go into a bunch of legal hassle surrounding the opening of camp until it's in their best interests. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

Not necessarily true. Until it gets reversed, other state courts can (obviously don't have to) rely on this ruling as  precedent on this issue.

Of course. But your point has nothing to do with mine. 

20 minutes ago, viffer said:

How does a state law get challenged in federal court? The state supreme court is the court of last resort for state law.

State law can only be challenged at SCOTUS for violating the US constitution. Nothing in the US constitution gives a state governor any powers. They come from the state constitution, and the state supreme court is the last arbiter of state law.

State laws get challenged for constitutionality all of the time in SCOTUS. That’s just how it works. Not going to get into it here because it’s not the time or place, but one or more of these stay at home orders could make its way to the highest court. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

State laws get challenged for constitutionality all of the time in SCOTUS. That’s just how it works. Not going to get into it here because it’s not the time or place, but one or more of these stay at home orders could make its way to the highest court. 

That's not how it works.

If a state supreme court ruling had ruled against an individual objecting to a stay at home order, then that individual could claim a violation of the US constitution against the state in federal court. This ruling went against the state. The state can't sue its own supreme court in federal court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ElBarrioJets said:

Well since the 2nd wave of infections will come when all these idiots run out to bars, training camp probably won't start on time. 

Based on the pictures of those who showed up at the bars -- fat, middle aged, out of shape -- the coronavirus must be doing a jig. Enclosed space, zero ventilation, alcohol to lower immunity and induce inflammation, no social distancing, no masks -- why worry? Darwin awards...

  • Upvote 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, viffer said:

That's not how it works.

If a state supreme court ruling had ruled against an individual objecting to a stay at home order, then that individual could claim a violation of the US constitution against the state in federal court. This ruling went against the state. The state can't sue its own supreme court in federal court.

Again, don’t really want to get into this here. Best to discontinue this conversation because it opens a can of worms. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, viffer said:

How does a state law get challenged in federal court? The state supreme court is the court of last resort for state law.

State law can only be challenged at SCOTUS for violating the US constitution. Nothing in the US constitution gives a state governor any powers. They come from the state constitution, and the state supreme court is the last arbiter of state law.

Actually  this is not all together true

 If there is something that occurs which is not covered in the constitution,  it is decided on at the state level. It's  probably why this is being done at the state level and not the federal.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, viffer said:

How does a state law get challenged in federal court? The state supreme court is the court of last resort for state law.

State law can only be challenged at SCOTUS for violating the US constitution. Nothing in the US constitution gives a state governor any powers. They come from the state constitution, and the state supreme court is the last arbiter of state law.

It will probably make it's appearance before  SCOTUS  under the right to work, or the right to assemble, or some other perceived slight of civil liberties.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...