snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > SLC Central > Soapbox Derby

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 16 December 2015, 01:08 AM
Esprise Me's Avatar
Esprise Me Esprise Me is offline
 
Join Date: 02 October 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,787
Default Missouri legislators want to revoke student athletes' scholarships if they protest

Two Missouri legislators have introduced a bill that would revoke the scholarships of college athletes who refuse to play for non-health-related reasons—reasons such as a strike to protest campus racism, like the one the Mizzou football team leveraged to great effect this fall.

Lawyer and former Las Vegas Sun sports reporter Steve Silver has already pointed out that the bill almost definitely violates student athletes’ freedoms of speech and assembly under Missouri’s own constitution, and that the university, as a state entity, “would be subject to a constitutional challenge, unlike a private employer.” The bill also plays into an ugly history in which schools expect to keep tight control over primarily black student athletes while getting their labor for free. Filmmaker and former NFL player Matthew Cherry tweeted the text Monday with the comment, “This is damn near modern day slavery.”

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor...s_if_they.html
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 16 December 2015, 01:09 AM
Esprise Me's Avatar
Esprise Me Esprise Me is offline
 
Join Date: 02 October 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,787
Default

I thought about just adding this to one of the threads we had discussing the various protests and related issues, but I couldn't figure out which one was best, and they've all been dormant at least a month.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 16 December 2015, 02:52 AM
Singing in the Drizzle Singing in the Drizzle is offline
 
Join Date: 24 November 2005
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 4,745
Default

Take it away for breaking laws I can see. Taking it away because you do not like what they say or how they say it is a definite violation of freedom of speech. This is the government punishing someone for speaking out.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 16 December 2015, 02:55 AM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 25,999
Default

College athletes who sexually assualt, drive drunk, or beat their girlfriends are still welcome.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 16 December 2015, 03:03 AM
Rebochan's Avatar
Rebochan Rebochan is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2002
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 11,611
Tantrum

But remember, it's the "crybullies" and their safe spaces that's the real threat to free speech
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 16 December 2015, 08:04 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,581
Read This!

OMG, have you read their demands??
Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
What a bunch of SJWs.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 16 December 2015, 01:52 PM
UEL's Avatar
UEL UEL is offline
 
Join Date: 01 August 2004
Location: Fredericton, Canada
Posts: 9,243
Baseball

I can see it from the perspective of being paid for games played, and to voluntarily not play, makes one lose pay.

But that is not how it is being couched in its terms.

I think paying athletes to play is not school anyways.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 16 December 2015, 02:07 PM
NobleHunter's Avatar
NobleHunter NobleHunter is offline
 
Join Date: 21 September 2005
Location: Peterborough, Ontario
Posts: 615
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UEL View Post
I can see it from the perspective of being paid for games played, and to voluntarily not play, makes one lose pay.

But that is not how it is being couched in its terms.

I think paying athletes to play is not school anyways.
Besides, if they paid them to play they'd have to treat them like actual employees. That wouldn't be cheap.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 16 December 2015, 02:42 PM
crescent crescent is offline
 
 
Join Date: 13 August 2008
Location: Right here
Posts: 2,518
Default

As has been demonstrated earlier, College Sports is very influential. If the atheletes refuse to play, the University Admin comes under extreme pressure, very fast. If they announce that they will refuse to play until the law is changed, then the legislators come under extreme pressure. This could have some potential to work if it were proposed at the national level, which would impact all colleges and universities the same. But anything that could hurt some unis but not other will be opposed by some very wealthy and powerful alumni.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 16 December 2015, 10:29 PM
Coughdrops Coughdrops is offline
 
 
Join Date: 15 June 2015
Location: Columbia, MO
Posts: 786
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
OMG, have you read their demands?? What a bunch of SJWs.
No, that's how a reasonable group of people interested in actually solving problems works. That's the exact opposite of a sjw or teabagger.

On topic, this is clearly just for show. The legislators know it's blatantly unconstitutional and can never stand, but it makes them look good to their base.

Calling the situation of college athletes slavery is just silly. AFAIK, slaves couldn't just decide to go to a different plantation if they didn't like the one they were at, or leave slavery altogether, and I'm sure non of them signed up for slavery in the first place.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 17 December 2015, 01:16 AM
Mouse's Avatar
Mouse Mouse is offline
 
Join Date: 10 July 2003
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 7,368
Mouse

John Oliver has an awesome segment talking about how college athletes are basically risking their bodies for little if any benefit. Before you say anything about scholarships, watch the video and answer the question of, "Okay, so what happens if they get hurt and can't play, after risking themselves on behalf of the school's sponsors?"

That and why exactly should colleges basically serve as the NFL's minor leagues in the first place?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 17 December 2015, 01:48 AM
Steve Steve is offline
 
Join Date: 19 October 2002
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 4,847
Default

Apparently, the bill's been withdrawn.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 17 December 2015, 02:53 AM
Rebochan's Avatar
Rebochan Rebochan is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2002
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 11,611
Fight

While I was looking for a news article confirming that, I did find a really fascinating overview of the history of atheletes and activism that puts the whole Mizzou story in a broader context and I wanted to share.

Why student-athlete activism is rattling cages

Quote:
Resistance to athlete activism is hardly new, Professor Jelks and others note.

Boxing legend Muhammad Ali faced sharp public criticism when, despite being drafted, he refused to enlist in the Vietnam War, saying, “I am not going 10,000 miles from home to help murder and burn another poor nation simply to continue the domination of white slave masters of the darker people the world over. This is the day when such evils must come to an end.”

He was subsequently charged with draft evasion, before the United States Supreme Court overturned his conviction.

In an opinion article for Time magazine, basketball Hall of Famer Kareem Abdul-Jabbar – who supported Mr. Ali during that period and has long advocated for equality and civil rights – writes of the opposition he continues to face when he presents himself as an activist and political commentator.

“Despite the fact that I’ve been writing about politics longer than I played basketball, many of my critics begin their comments with, “Stick to basketball, Kareem.” But … [b]y dismissing someone’s opinions based on profession, such critics are also dismissing their own opinions as frivolous (“Stick to plumbing!” “Stick to tax dodging!” “Stick to proctology!”). Whose vocation makes them an expert on all social or political matters? As we’ve seen during the presidential campaign, even the candidates aren’t experts.”
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 17 December 2015, 05:08 AM
Coughdrops Coughdrops is offline
 
 
Join Date: 15 June 2015
Location: Columbia, MO
Posts: 786
Default

Here in Columbia we had some of the arguments that the article mentioned, but there was another undercurrent of resentment. Some people assume that college athletes live cushy lives and get lots of illegal gifts and money from the schools and recruiters. So they see it as "Rich people complaining."

Granted I'm sure there are some examples of crooked deals in college athletics (with that much money involved some corruption is inevitable), but the vast majority are hard working young men and women who make great sacrifices for their teams and schools. And when they wish to protest something, of course they're going to use the tactic most likely to get noticed.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 17 December 2015, 07:54 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 6,905
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coughdrops View Post
Granted I'm sure there are some examples of crooked deals in college athletics (with that much money involved some corruption is inevitable), but the vast majority are hard working young men and women who make great sacrifices for their teams and schools.
And, a person that plays NCAA field hockey (or any other NCAA sport) has the exact same requirements for participation as a kid that plays football or basketball for a major sport school. It doesn't even matter if the kid has a scholarship or not.

My daughter plays an NCAA sport at the varsity level at a very big name school but doesn't have a scholarship. If a relative wanted to give her an old beat up car as a gift she would have to explain that gift to the NCAA in order to maintain athletic eligibility. If she didn't notify the NCAA about the gift that would be grounds for disbarment.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 17 December 2015, 07:56 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 6,905
Default

Is there any legal precedence for "freedom of speech" enabling a person to break a contract?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 18 December 2015, 02:35 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,581
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmy101_again View Post
Is there any legal precedence for "freedom of speech" enabling a person to break a contract?
Yes. This is the basic premise of many decisions protecting the politics, speech, assembly, and association of union (and non-union) workers. Employers sometimes can make certain reasonable limits on those activities but they can't infringe those basic rights. Private institutions, such as the *ah ah - bulsht - excuse me; had a sneeze* private athletic department, may not always be subject to those limits but they often are. Public institutions, such as the university almost always are. The state legislature is, of course, always subject to the limits of the state constitution (which is the constitutional law in question in this case).
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 18 December 2015, 09:12 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 6,905
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganzfeld View Post
Yes. This is the basic premise of many decisions protecting the politics, speech, assembly, and association of union (and non-union) workers. Employers sometimes can make certain reasonable limits on those activities but they can't infringe those basic rights. Private institutions, such as the *ah ah - bulsht - excuse me; had a sneeze* private athletic department, may not always be subject to those limits but they often are. Public institutions, such as the university almost always are. The state legislature is, of course, always subject to the limits of the state constitution (which is the constitutional law in question in this case).
I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing. For example, compare these two cases:

1. Employee, outside of work, marches in a protest the employer doesn't like. Employer fires employee.

2. Employee doesn't go to work so they can attend a protest. Employer fires employee.

In the first case the employer (especially if the employer is the gov't) has a significant problem. In the second case I don't see a free speech issue at all. The employee didn't show up for work which is ground for termination, unless... the protest is a labor strike against the employer.

In the case of athletic scholarships would that be similar to an employee not being fire-able for striking? Is the strike about the employees job conditions or about how the organization treats some one else?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 18 December 2015, 09:17 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 25,999
Default

In the case of these students, the business-world analogy could be that the employee is refusing to go to work because the employer is not addressing issues that create a hostile workplace.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 18 December 2015, 09:23 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 6,905
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
In the case of these students, the business-world analogy could be that the employee is refusing to go to work because the employer is not addressing issues that create a hostile workplace.
So that would probably qualify as a strike.

Of course, the courts have never really ruled if scholarship athletes are employees or not.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Here’s how looks if male athletes were asked same questions as female athletes TallGeekyGirl Social Studies 1 04 November 2015 03:24 PM
House Votes to Revoke Legal Protections for Millions of Immigrants snopes Soapbox Derby 0 14 January 2015 07:35 PM
Arizona Legislators Want High Schoolers to Recite a Loyalty Oath Before Graduating St. Alia Soapbox Derby 29 27 January 2013 01:33 AM
Unclaimed scholarships snopes College 9 27 January 2010 07:13 PM
Wrong scholarships awarded; makes no difference snopes College 10 20 June 2007 07:56 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.