Hey folks - as a member of the DawgNation community, please remember to abide by simple rules of civil engagement with other members:
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
Options
Comments
Ahh, but the code is a NCAA and SEC code adopted by UGA. Either way, they have to prove why dismissing someone for violation of that code was unconstitutional and that the code itself actually was too.
My guess is they're going with "the first and fourteenth amendment supersede any SEC/NCAA code" claim.
But like I said, they're trying to get paid out of court and it'll probably work as UGA just wants this never ending Sasser/Fields thing in the rearview.
I'm no lawyer, but I'm not sure how that makes sense. His speech is protected by the first amendment, meaning he can say whatever he wants. The first amendment however, does not protect you from consequences.
Sasser's attorney will make the case that UGA overreacted to this situation given the current political climate, that their decision was unfair to Sasser, and that it cost him his career. She can probably show that Sasser was on track to be a high draft pick and missed out on the chance to earn millions of dollars. She will stipulate that Sasser made a terrible mistake and has genuine regret, which he has previously expressed. She will argue that this law suit was not his preferred course of action but the last resort.
Many people think UGA did the right thing and Sasser got what he deserved. But many people may feel that he was treated unfairly. Especially if his attorney can persuade Justin Fields to take the stand and say that he has no hard feelings toward Sasser and never asked for or wanted him to be kicked off the baseball team.
Don't think that Fields even matters in this situation and I would say that they could just show the Student code of conduct and that point would be immediately moot. UGA gets to "react" however they want as long as they followed their stated procedures.
I think everything UGA did was above board, but they are bound by the first amendment. They can't regulate protected speech as a government institution
Fields matters if the plaintiff's attorney calls him to the stand and he provides helpful testimony that persuades a jury to find in favor of Sasser.
UGA can still lose the case even if they successfully show they followed their procedures.
How is the code of conduct "moot" ?
again... The first amendment means he can say it, doesn't mean that they cannot punish him, freedom of speech does not prevent punishing conduct that intimidates, harasses, or threatens another person, even if words are used.
Fields saying "i didn't ask for him to be expelled" would be a moot point
Got it...Thanks!
It's not moot if the jury finds it compelling or persuasive.
Fields' personal opinion of the situation has no impact on whether or not UGA has the right to expel Mr. Sasser or whether they did it in the correct manner
I'm not saying it does. I'm just saying it could decide the case. That's how jury trials work.
If it isn't relevant it will not be admitted into court. But if for some reason, they see it as relevant, sure.
This I agree with....butttt UGA has REPEATEDLY protected a certain GA for lecturing some strong words...even as far as the killing of whites. His case will use this as a double standard.
Btw....I think both should have been long gone. I do not see how either deserves the privilege to be at the school.
And yes UGA will give him a settlement. For one it is cheaper. And secondly, they are wanting this to go away quickly. Drawing attention to either Sasser or the professor will be huge press all over again.
Very high bar to keep such testimony out. Cannot see that happening. The question is not just whether UGA acted properly but whether they acted fairly. At least that is how the plaintiff's attorney will try to frame the issue to the jury.
How many commenting here have law degrees? Just wondering...
I liken it to burning an American Flag, in most places it's socially unacceptable and in a lot of place would cause an argument or psychical altercation but it's protected under the 1st amendment. If a student was burning a flag in protest on campus, would they be expelled? No one is going to ague that what Sasser did was acceptable, they will argue that he was not fairly punished and the fall out cost him millions. If Sasser was not a baseball player and was not recognized, would he have been expelled? Would this have been publicized ?
UGA did the right thing regardless of the outcome but I don't think this ever get's to a court room. I don't think either side want the negative fall out that could come with the publicity.
As offensive as I find the GA's comments, he enjoys even greater protection because it is deemed political speech.