UFC sues New York to overturn MMA ban
Posted on November 15, 2011, 06:50 PM by Trent Reinsmith
For the past few years the UFC has tried to get the New York ban on MMA lifted via legislative means. The promotion had little success making inroads through those channels, so they decided to change tack on Tuesday, filing a lawsuit against the state of New York claiming the ban violates the First Amendment.
At the root of the lawsuit is the question as to why the state banned MMA. If they banned the sport because they felt that it sent a message of violence, then the UFC has precedent to fall back on, specifically Brown v Entertainment Merchants Association. In that case, the court found that, in short, expressions of violence (in that case in video games) are protected by the First Amendment.
When asked about the suit, Barry Friedman, a NYU law professor warned not to expect the case to fly through the courts, “The judicial process can be slow. Typically, it would take the state a month or so just to respond, and we would have some initial briefing. Typically what happens in a case like this is that the defendants file a motion to dismiss, which says, Look, even if we accept it's true, everything that they've said in their complaint, we still win on the law. So usually that gets litigated and it takes a while. At some point in there, the party starts to take discovery, which means they do depositions and gather evidence that they want to present in court, and that takes a while. So it's not the kind of thing that happens over night.” – for more see MMAFighting.com
To read the entire complaint: Click Here
What do you think LowKick’ers, will MMA be legal in New York and if so, when?
Photo: UFC President Dana White at a post-fight press conference at UFC 100 at the Mandalay Bay Events Center on July 11, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. Francis Specker
2011.11.15 Complaint
Comments
damn, they aint messin around no more
Good stuff, show those crooked politicians whats up guys!
States have the autonomy to decide what is best for them, its called Democracy and protected by the constitution. Pissing them off by suing will just prolong getting NY as a viable market. We all want to see MMA in the garden, but showing them the loss of revenue by not sanctioning it makes more sense than wasting money on a tough market when you can sell out any and every show in Canada, California, Vegas, Brazil, and Abu Dhabi. Form a PAC to lobby the polititions and go the the proper channels. For instance....Maryland finally legalized slot gambling, only after seeing a huge amount of revenue being lost to West Virginia who has slots and now Table games. Its about show me the money, not sue and have it tied up in court for years on appeals.
Can't believe someone weaked your post, as there's much sense in there. Not the spelling of politicians though lol.
These would all be good points if were in a democracy but we're not. The united states is a Democratic Republic, which means the peoples votes only count towards their representation. The representation elected is then 'supposed to be' held responsible for carrying out the actions of the people. States have individual rights meaning they can decide what is legal or not as long as it falls under their constitutional restrictions.
That being said, Dana and the UFC are approaching this exactly as they should. They are appealing to the highest court they can at the moment with direct cause and their case entirely laid out. By law it has to be viewed and then go through due process. They are trying to prove to the uninformed, uneducated, and the people who can one day change it. If the end result is it shows how terrible the power control level is for that politician/state rep and most likely get them voted out in these upcoming elections that they are BOTH up for in 2012 and 2014. If Dana can't convince the current decision makers, he is going to try to make sure he puts the right people who will there instead.
The State of NY has no legal precedence outside of initial bias. They will prove it is ilegal to say, Growing Pink Lemons is Legal, Growing Yellow Lemons is Legal, Selling Sugar Water is legal, Making lemonade is legal, but Selling it is Illegal. Same will apply to MMA.
@fauxartist: Yes, states have autonomy regarding certain decisions. I am a huge proponent of states rights and limited federal government. However, individual states don't have the right to overrule the Constitution. Like Trent mentions below, this seems pretty simply a matter of First Amendment rights. A state cannot just overrule Constitutional rights - even if 100% of the people want to. For example, if 100% of the people in NY want slavery, the state can't just say "well, that's what our decision is." The UFC is doing the right thing here. Enough's enough already with this nonsense.
wouldnt the basis of video games and movies containing violence not be a legit arguement in court, since they are fictional though ???
From what I gathered, by stating that they were banning MMA because it was perceived as violent in image, is a violation of the First Amendment. The states argument that it is something that should be banned also falls a bit flat since they allow almost all of the individual martial arts that are used in MMA. They also allow gyms and training in MMA, they just don't allow professional events...not sure if that makes it clearer or just clouds things event further...ah...the law...always so crystal clear.
well no doubt i hope to see it come thru. as a martial artist myself, i only see good in it, fun and respect in the combat sport, no the desire to hurt the opponent. if everyone could see it that way, then obviously there is no problem, but there are those on the street and in the gym who view things differently, disrespectful and are a negative aspect toward our arguement.
Just take a vote of every human being residing in the State of New York and see how many want MMA sanctioned in that State. It's amazing how a few hard headed politicians can decide how things are. MMA will get to New York but no time soon. Your right Trent.......our legal system is very complicated but it's ours and its what we got.
What happened to people's constitutional right not to watch a certain type of content if they choose so?
No one is taking that away, it's called changing the channel.
Constitutional rights cannot be overruled by State decisions, regardless of majority opinion within the state.
Freedom of speech was not created to protect discussions about flowers and apricots.
Good to see zuffa standing up for what's right
Why is jon jones and gina etc. On there? I thought it was zuffa sueing ny. The employees are involved too or just these certain ones taking action as well??
So who read the entire thing? :P
Humm, didn't read but checked every page.
Hope Zuffa wins this so ufc can go to ny!