The century-long rivalry between the Yankees and the Boston Red Sox has carried over to the court. Only this time, the Evil Empire has been sued by “the little guy”—a Red Sox fan. What else makes for a better headline?
On April 16, 2009, the New York Civil Liberties Union filed a complaint against the Yankees and the NYPD on behalf of Mr. Bradford Campeau-Laurion, a 30-year old resident of Astoria, Queens, who was allegedly forcibly ejected by NYPD officers during the seventh inning stretch when the song “God Bless America” was played.
According to the original Complaint, April 26, 2008 was the day Mr. Bradford Campeau-Laurion’s would attend a game at the old Yankees stadium for the last time. After pouring a few beers down the hatch, he got up to use the restroom but was stopped by a few NYPD officers, who tried to restrict him from moving while the song “God Bless America” was played. He declined to obey their request; they threw him out; he asserted that his First Amendment rights, among others, have been violated; and he sued.
What were the NYPD officers doing serving bouncer function during a baseball game? The Complaint points out that the NYPD has a “Paid Detail” program, which allows private business entities to hire fully uniformed police officers to “appear to be on duty” so that they can maintain order and security inside the Yankees stadium. In the case at hand, the NYPD officers working under the program were responsible for enforcing the “no-movement” policy, which seeks to restrict fan movement during the playing of “God Bless America.” The policy was approved by George Steinbrenner and is supposed to express patriotism and honor the nation.
The central issue here is whether the plaintiff can establish the Yankees as a state actor. Generally, the constitutional guarantee under the First Amendment is applicable only when state actors – federal, state or municipal governments alike — are involved. In other words, the Constitution protects individuals from constitutional violations by governments but not by private actors.
However, there are always exceptions. A private actor’s conduct will be deemed state action under four legal tests the courts have developed. These legal tests are: (1) symbiotic relationship; (2) entwinement; (3) exclusive public function; and (4) state compulsion. If the Plaintiff cannot establish the Yankees as a state actor under these tests, then the Yankees could easily argue that the fan merely had a revocable license or privilege granted by his license, but not an inherent right, to be on Yankees property. Or alternatively, the Yankees could argue that the fan has failed to perform his contractual obligation to follow the no-movement policy during the seventh inning stretch when the song “God Bless America” was played.
The Complaint goes into details trying to establish a “symbiotic relationship” between the government and the Yankees based on the old stadium being leased by New York City to the Yankees on favorable terms, and both parties received financial benefits from their joint use of the stadium. Further, there appears, arguably, a certain level of entwinement between the City and the Yankees, as NYPD officers were hired to “appear to be on duty” and to enforce the no-movement policy instituted by the Yankees. According to the Complaint, a NYPD document states that officers should be “working directly for the vendor (the Yankees).” In deciding whether entwinement exists, the court will take all of these relevant facts into consideration.
This is an excellent case for students of constitutional law and sports law, but one more complex than it seems. It would be interesting to see how the court rules.
Meanwhile, George Steinbrenner probably couldn’t care less about the little guy, or a Boston fan. He is more worried about how much more money will be spent to win just one game.
Click here for the story: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202429939252&rss=newswire
Richard Symmes
Jay Hsu
