Irving could also object to the terms in which the Nets say he would be eligible to return. He could insist there is no precedent for a player being punished by their team for statements, or omitted statements, about subject matter and that the Nets failed to give him notice that his speech could trigger a suspension. Irving would likely argue that while the team says he is being punished for “conduct detrimental,” he is being punished instead for speech. A grievance would be heard by a neutral grievance arbitrator. Irving, through the NBPA, can file a grievance challenging the Nets’ imposition of discipline for violation of a team rule. Irving, however, can insist that the basis of his suspension is otherwise lawful speech. Over the years, a number of NBA players have been suspended for violent acts, drug violations, law breaking and other forms of misconduct.
The NBA recently fined-but did not suspend-Minnesota Timberwolves guard Anthony Edwards for homophobic comments on social media. In the UPC, a player is contractually obligated to both “conduct himself on and off the court according to the highest standards of honesty, citizenship, and sportsmanship” and “not to do anything that is materially detrimental or materially prejudicial to the best interests of the Team or the League.”Ī player whose statements can reasonably be construed as espousing antisemitic views would be conducting himself in a way that is “materially detrimental or materially prejudicial to the best interests of the Team or the League” and arguably betrays basic elements of “citizenship and sportsmanship.”īut Irving might contend that there is a lack of precedent of NBA players being suspended by their teams for speech or ideology. The NBA and NBPA have also negotiated a uniform player contract that broadly defines conduct detrimental.
While the First Amendment protects employees from punishment by the government, it doesn’t insulate them from their employers taking action-particularly employers in the private sector, such as NBA teams. Generally speaking, employers can punish employees for their speech and characterize speech as conduct detrimental. … To all Jewish families and communities that are hurt and affected from my post, I am deeply sorry to have caused you pain, and I apologize.”
#The nets arent unbeatable its ok full#
Later Thursday night, after the Nets announced Irving’s suspension, he posted an apology on Instagram, writing in part, “While doing research on YHWH, I posted a documentary that contained some false antisemitic statements, narratives and language that were untrue and offensive to the Jewish race/religion, and I take full accountability and responsibly for my actions. Accordingly, we are of the view that he is currently unfit to be associated with the Brooklyn Nets.” “Such failure to disavow antisemitism when given a clear opportunity to do so is deeply disturbing, is against the values of our organization, and constitutes conduct detrimental to the team. This was not the first time he had the opportunity-but failed-to clarify,” the Nets said in a statement. “We were dismayed today, when given an opportunity in a media session, that Kyrie refused to unequivocally say he has no antisemitic beliefs, nor acknowledge specific hateful material in the film.
The move comes a week after Irving posted on his Twitter feed a link to the 2018 documentary, Hebrews to Negroes: Wake Up Black America, which has been roundly criticized as antisemitic. The Nets have suspended Kyrie Irving for at least five games, calling the point guard “currently unfit to be associated with the Brooklyn Nets” after he repeatedly failed to “unequivocally say he has no antisemitic beliefs.”
0 kommentar(er)
