NCAA Says Anti-LGBT Discrimination Could Cost Houston, Indianapolis Future Sporting Events
Upcoming Final Fours Won’t Be Moved, But Future Bids Will Be Impacted
The NCAA has indicated it will reconsider host cities for future sporting events based on whether they have laws protecting LGBT people against discrimination.
Those cities include Indianapolis, which is set to host the NCAA Men’s Final Four in 2021. This week, Indiana legislators introduced an anti-discrimination bill with exemptions so broad that Lambda Legal has called it a “road map for discrimination against LGBT people.”
The Indy Star notes that the Final Four pumped $71 million into the local economy when it was held in Indianapolis this year.Â
“We’ll continue to review current events in all cities bidding on NCAA championships and events, as well as cities that have already been named as future host sites, such as Indianapolis,†Bob Williams, NCAA senior vice president for communications, wrote in a statement to the newspaper Nov. 12.
The NCAA, officially the National Collegiate Athletic Association, regulates athletes in over 1200 colleges and institutions for most college sports. Based in Indianapolis, it is responsible for over 450,000 student athletes and took in nearly $1 billion in revenue last year.
After voters in Houston repealed an equal rights ordinance this month, some called on the NCAA to move the 2016 Final Four out of the city. However, the NCAA has said it has no plans to do so.Â
Dan Gavitt, the NCAA’s vice president for the Final Four, told The Indy Star it will remain in Houston because “it takes years to plan and implement this world-class event.” Likewise, the 2016 Women’s Final Four will remain in Indianapolis.Â
The newspaper notes that four of the next five NCAA Men’s Final Fours are scheduled to be held in states that don’t have LGBT-inclusive nondiscrimination laws, raising questions about how much lead time is needed to move an event. But the NCAA hasn’t divulged those details.Â
“There are many factors in a thorough bid process that the NCAA considers when determining what cities will host the Final Four, including but not limited to local, city and state laws and ordinances,” Williams said in his statement to the newspaper.Â
Along with the NFL keeping the 2017 Super Bowl in Houston, the NCAA’s decision not to move the Final Four has led anti-LGBT groups to suggest economic arguments in support of the city’s equal rights ordinance were nothing but a straw man. In fact, one anti-LGBT activist is attempting to flip the equation, launching a petition calling on the Republican Party of Texas to move its 2016 convention out of Dallas, based on the city’s recent decision to strengthen transgender protections. The Texas GOP reportedly has no plans to move the convention, even though many Democrats in Dallas likely would cheer such a decision.
RELATED:Â Indiana GOP Introduces Nondiscrimination Bill LGBT Group Calls ‘Road Map For Discrimination’
Of course, even if anti-LGBT groups’ straw man allegation had merit, it would amount to the pot calling the kettle black, given that opponents of the Houston ordinance built their entire campaign around the fear-mongering lie that it would lead to men entering women’s restrooms to prey on victims. But the reality is that both Houston and Indiana have undeniably taken major hits when it comes to their national image, and that’s likely to have long-term economic consequences.Â
Jessica Shortall, who manages a coalition of Texas businesses that support LGBT inclusion, told The Texas Tribune that business fallout over discriminatory laws is frequently subtle and not quantifiable.Â
“On a broader scale, there’s a talent issue to think about,†Shortall said. “Especially when we’re looking at millennials, the brand of a place is something that people who care about attracting talent to a state or region think about.â€
After the Indiana Legislature passed an anti-LGBT religious freedom law earlier this year, the NCAA said that even though it kept the 2015 Final Four in Indianapolis, the controversy was “a big deal” that “could lead to significant changes in the NCAA’s relationship with Indianapolis and the state of Indiana …”
The statement was part of an overwhelming backlash from the business community that ultimately prompted the Indiana Legislature to amend the law to include LGBT protections. Similarly, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed an anti-LGBT law in 2014 after the NFL began exploring the possibility of moving the 2015 Super Bowl.Â
Although more than 60 businesses endorsed Houston’s equal rights ordinance, the NCAA and NFL were largely silent in the leadup to the Nov. 3 vote. Even if it would have been logistically impossible to move the 2016 Final Four or the 2017 Super Bowl, the NCAA and NFL dropped the ball by not speaking out forcefully and publicly in support of the ordinance.Â
In that sense, the NCAA’s recent statements to The Indy Star may be too little, too late for Houston, but perhaps not for Indiana, which typically hosts the Men’s Final Four every five years.Â
Hudson Taylor, founder of Athlete Ally, touched on the critical role sports have played in civil rights movements.Â
“The most impactful moments in history are the ones when social issues and sports intersected,” Taylor told the newspaper. “When Jackie Robinson stepped onto the playing field. The black power salute at the 1968 Olympics. Those are the moments that change a country.”
Â
Image by WFIU Public Radio/Scott Witzke/WTIUÂ via Flickr and a CC licenseÂ
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
Republican lawmakers are reportedly at an impasse on whether or not they should be defending former President Donald Trump amid his latest flurry of legal woes. The party is also facing challenges with navigating some lawmakers’ critical assessments of law enforcement over the Trump investigation.
A new analysis is breaking down Republicans’ seemingly flawed response and how it underscores the cracks in the political party’s foundation.
According to Axios, the analysis comes shortly after documents released on Friday, August 12, offered details about the search which reportedly involved “highly classified materials believed stored in violation of the law at the ex-president’s private residence.”
Prior to the release of those documents, Republicans serving on the House Intelligence Committee participated in a press conference where they continued to criticize the investigation, describing it as being politically motivated.
Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) scrutinized the investigation deeming it a “complete abuse” of authority as she suggested it was being conducted because the former president is considered to be “Joe Biden’s most likeliest political opponent in 2024.”
However, some Republicans on the committee have offered a more leveled approach to the situation. Per The New York Times, “Trump allies have told top Republicans to tone down their criticism of the Justice Department ‘because it is possible that more damaging information related to the search will become public.'”
“It’s incumbent upon everybody to act in a way that’s becoming of the office they hold,” said Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), a former FBI agent, “And that’s not casting judgment on anything until you know all the facts.”
Others have attempted to defend the former president. Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) said, “You can say nuclear weapons, but there are things that are highly, highly classified, there are things that are not extremely classified.”
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) is now selling merchandise on her website in support of a call to “defund the FBI” while Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) tweeted, “I will support a complete dismantling and elimination of the democrat brown shirts known as the FBI.”
Image: Elise Stefanik with Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago via Facebook
Donald Trump is responding to news reports he is under FBI investigation for actions covered by the Espionage Act by making apparently false claims about his mishandling of classified documents and about former President Barack Obama.
“Number one, it was all declassified,” Trump says in a post on his Truth Social site, a claim legal experts say is incorrect. For any president to declassify documents, experts say, there is a process that involves actions being taken on each individual document. They also say the president does not have legal authority to declassify documents related to nuclear weapons.
“Number two,” Trump continues, “they didn’t need to ‘seize’ anything. They could have had it anytime they wanted without playing politics and breaking into Mar-a-Lago. It was in secured storage, with an additional lock put on as per their request.”
READ MORE: FBI Agents Searched Mar-a-Lago for ‘Classified Documents Relating to Nuclear Weapons’: Report
Again, according to reports, that too is false. DOJ issued a subpoena after the National Archives tried to get all the documents back and Trump still did not comply.
“They could have had it anytime they wanted—and that includes LONG ago,” he continues in a separate post on Truth Social. “ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS ASK.”
Again, multiple reports say they did, numerous times.
READ MORE: DOJ Served Trump With Grand Jury Subpoena for Classified Documents Months Before FBI Raid: Report
None of his responses explain why he had at Mar-a-Lago what we now know were at least 35 cartons – 20 retrieved on Monday and 15 earlier this year – of items including confidential, classified, and top secret documents that were required by law to have been handed over to the National Archives.
“The bigger problem is,” Trump says, “what are they going to do with the 33 million pages of documents, many of which are classified, that President Obama took to Chicago?”
That is also false.
The National Archives on Friday issued a statement after Trump repeatedly spread the false claim that former President Barack Obama had 33 million documents in his possession.
“President Barack Hussein Obama kept 33 million pages of documents, much of them classified. How many of them pertained to nuclear? Word is, lots!” was one of Trump’s false attacks on his Truth Social site.
“The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) assumed exclusive legal and physical custody of Obama Presidential records when President Barack Obama left office in 2017, in accordance with the Presidential Records Act (PRA),” the Archives said in a statement posted to its website Friday.
“NARA moved approximately 30 million pages of unclassified records to a NARA facility in the Chicago area where they are maintained exclusively by NARA,” the Archives added. “Additionally, NARA maintains the classified Obama Presidential records in a NARA facility in the Washington, DC, area. As required by the PRA, former President Obama has no control over where and how NARA stores the Presidential records of his Administration.”
BREAKING NEWS
Trump Under FBI Investigation for Potential Violation of the Espionage Act Legal Experts Say
‘Simply Jaw-Dropping’: Legal Experts Also Stunned Over Top Secret, Confidential Contents of Cartons FBI Seized From Mar-a-Lago
“A search warrant viewed by POLITICO reveals that the FBI is investigating Donald Trump for a potential violation of the Espionage Act and removed classified documents from the former president’s Florida estate earlier this week,” Politico reports.
The New York Times also confirms.
“Federal agents who executed the warrant did so to investigate potential crimes associated with violations of the Espionage Act, which outlaws the unauthorized retention of national security information that could harm the United States or aid a foreign adversary; a federal law that makes it a crime to destroy or conceal a document to obstruct a government investigation; and another statute associated with unlawful removal of government materials.”
Based on the search warrant released to far-right media outlet Breitbart News, multiple legal experts also say Donald Trump, the former president is under FBI investigation for potentially violating the Espionage Act.
READ MORE: FBI Agents Searched Mar-a-Lago for ‘Classified Documents Relating to Nuclear Weapons’: Report
“A federal magistrate judge has found probable cause to believe evidence of the crime of ESPIONAGE to be found at Mar-A-Lago. Repeat 5 times,” writes former U.S. Attorney and DOJ official Harry Litman, now an LA Times legal affairs columnist. He also notes that “top secret/compartmented is stratospherically high classification. Scandal he ever had in [those documents] the first place.”
Top national security lawyer Brad Moss writes: “18 U.S.C. 793 – Espionage Act. That’s for willful/grossly negligent removal of information relating to the national defense. 18 U.S.C. 2017 and 18 U.S.C. 1519 – that’s for concealing federal records.”
Moss also retweeted this statement by veteran Cox Radio Capitol Hill correspondent Jamie Dupree:
“So the leak of the Trump search warrant via Breitbart indicates that former President Donald Trump is under investigation for violating the Espionage Act and for Obstruction of Justice.”
Civil liberties and national security journalist Marcy Wheeler also confirms, writing: “The hilarious thing is that since Brietbart doesn’t even know what a Supervisory Special Agent is, they probably don’t realize they’ve confirmed that Trump is under investigation for violating the Espionage Act.”
Western New England University School of Law law professor Jennifer Taub also confirms, writing: “Donald Trump is being investigated for espionage.”
The Wall Street Journal was first to publish details of what FBI agents seized from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago mansion on Monday. Legal experts have been calling Friday afternoon’s revelations “jaw-dropping.”
FBI agents “removed 11 sets of classified documents, including some marked as top secret and meant to be only available in special government facilities, according to documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal,” the WSJ report states.
Despite initial reports the FBI seized between ten and 12 cartons of documents and other materials unlawfully removed from the White House to Mar-a-Lago, there were 20 cartons retrieved. That is in addition to the 15 cartons the National Archives were forced to retrieve earlier this year.
“The list includes references to one set of documents marked as ‘Various classified/TS/SCI documents,’ an abbreviation that refers to top-secret/sensitive compartmented information. It also says agents collected four sets of top secret documents, three sets of secret documents, and three sets of confidential documents. The list didn’t provide any more details about the substance of the documents.”
The classified/TS/SCI markings are the most important.
Legal experts say the search warrant was “broad,” and indeed the Journal reports the warrant “shows that FBI agents sought to search ‘the 45 Office,’ as well as ‘all storage rooms and all other rooms or areas within the premises used or available to be used by [the former president] and his staff and in which boxes or documents could be stored, including all structures or buildings on the estate.'”
Late Thursday evening The Washington Post revealed FBI agents were looking to retrieve classified documents “related to nuclear weapons,” making Monday’s raid all the more important, and Trump and his teams handling – or mishandling – of those documents all the more egregious.
The George Washington University Law School’s Professor of Government Procurement Law, Steven L. Schooner, says, “removal of, failure to account for, & failure to return (under subpoena) ‘classified/TS/SCI documents’ is, ugh, simply jaw-dropping, and that’s regardless of whether it’s nuclear-related.”
This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change.
Trump Makes False Claims About Classified Documents – And Obama
New Analysis Breaks Down GOP’s Flawed Response to the Mar-a-Lago Search
New Analysis Breaks Down GOP’s Flawed Response to the Mar-a-Lago Search
Trump Makes False Claims About Classified Documents – And Obama
Trump Under FBI Investigation for Potential Violation of the Espionage Act Legal Experts Say
Watch: Boebert’s Mic Cut After Going Over Time and Refusing to End Lie-Filled Rant
Right-Wing Dark-Money Group Gives Trump Timely Political Cover With $1 Million Attack on Merrick Garland
RIGHT WING EXTREMISM2 days agoSuspect Who Shot Up FBI Office Days After Mar-a-Lago Raid Was Trump Supporter Who Called to Kill FBI ‘On Sight’: Report
RIGHT WING EXTREMISM3 days agoDem Congressman Posts Horrific Audio of Violent Death Threat Against Him and His Family by Caller Praising ‘Trump 2024’
News2 days agoDOJ Served Trump With Grand Jury Subpoena for Classified Documents Months Before FBI Raid: Report
BREAKING NEWS2 days agoWatch: Merrick Garland Calls Trump’s Bluff, Strikes Back at MAGA World’s False Claims in Mar-a-Lago Raid
BREAKING NEWS2 days agoGunman Threatens and Tries to Break Into FBI Field Office in Ohio – Armed Suspect on the Loose: Reports
News2 days agoWatch: Beto O’Rourke Swears at Heckler for Laughing at Uvalde Deaths: ‘It May Be Funny to You … But It’s Not to Me’
BREAKING NEWS2 days agoFBI Agents Searched Mar-a-Lago for ‘Classified Documents Relating to Nuclear Weapons’: Report
COMMENTARY2 days agoGarland’s ‘Beautiful Chess Move’ Praised as Judge Sets Expedited Schedule to Unseal Warrant
