On Friday evening, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas granted the temporary restraining order (TRO) requested by the NFLPA stemming from the six-game ban the NFL levied against Dallas Cowboys running back Ezekiel Elliott.
It was a resounding legal victory for Elliott, his legal team and the NFLPA itself. It also paints the league office, commissioner Roger Goodell included, in a bad light.
In granting the TRO, the judge made sure to note that the case itself was nothing his court has ever seen before.
Judge: "The circumstances of this case are unmatched by any case this Court has seen"
— Gabe Feldman (@SportsLawGuy) September 8, 2017
It potentially sets further precedent in the case and the NFLPA’s continued arbitration battle over Goodell’s power.
Breaking: #Cowboys RB Ezekiel Elliott has been granted on his request for a "preliminary injunction." pic.twitter.com/CifzXvgnyi
— JosinaAnderson (@JosinaAnderson) September 8, 2017
In responding to the ruling on Friday, the NFLPA put the league on absolute blast. The attack comes on two different fronts, and tells us where the union stands following the legal victory.
Our statement on today's ruling on the temporary restraining order in the Ezekiel Elliott case: pic.twitter.com/g46h7qh2GI
— NFLPA (@NFLPA) September 8, 2017
“Commissioner discipline will continue to be a distraction from our game for one reason: because NFL owners have refused to collectively bargain a fair and transparent process that exists in other sports. This ‘imposed’ system remains problematic for players and the game,” the statement read. “But as the honest and honorable testimony of a few NFL employees recently revealed, it also demonstrates the continued lack of integrity within their own league office.”
Whew. Now, that’s a whopper of a statement to make.
Basically, the union is claiming that Goodell’s power of arbitration over suspensions and other punishments has caused a rift within the league office itself.
This comes after an NFL investigator was reportedly silenced by the NFL for recommending no ban in regards to the Elliott case. The issue for said investigator was that evidence didn’t warrant an Elliott suspension.
That’s pretty much the same thing the court used as a guise to rule in the NFLPA’s favor on Friday.
Jugde Mazzant upheld the "credible evidence" standard from the #NFL's own language in the Personal Conduct Policy. #EECase pic.twitter.com/mPjceQvlLD
— JosinaAnderson (@JosinaAnderson) September 8, 2017
It could lead to long-term issues within the NFL league office.
As it is, the union made sure that Friday’s ruling didn’t pass without putting the NFL itself on blast. How fun.