About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


14 Prof. Sports & L. 1 (2023)

handle is hein.journals/profsptla14 and id is 1 raw text is: PREFESIENAL S March-April 2023. Volume 14, Issue 1 and the Galette v. Goodell: Federal Judge Tosses Athlete's $300M Racial Bias Suit By James Molen, Partner at Greenberg Glusker LLP n recent years, there has been a signifi- cant increase in public awareness and discourse surrounding issues of race and discrimination within various industries, including professional sports. One high- profile case that has drawn attention to these issues is that of Galette v. Goodell, in which former NFL linebacker, Junior Galette, alleged that he was subjected to racial discrimination by the league. Un- fortunately for Galette, his case failed to make it past the pleading stage. Neverthe- less, it does shed light on the experiences of Black athletes who continue to face barriers and bias within the NFL While not Galette's first tangle with the NFL (he was previously suspended by the league for two games in 2015 after a domestic violence charge that was later dropped), Galette's recently dismissed lawsuit certainly marked his most ambi- tious confrontation. It all started onAugust23, 2022, when, five years after his last NFL game, Galette brought a lawsuit in Florida federal court seeking $300 million in damages, accus- ing the league of racially discriminating against him and blacklisting him because he exercised his free speech rights. As alleged by Galette, he had previously spoken out several times on social media See RACIAL on paqe 25 Slur r'_ ® ® ® of Soldier Field nute By Courtney E Dunn, of Segal McCambridge or decades, Mexico national soc- cer team fans have been known to chant eeeh puto from the stands, which translates to a derogatory term for male sex workers. When fourl members of the LGBTQ+ community (Plaintiffs) at- tended the 2019 Confederation ofNorth, Central America and Caribbean Associa- tion Football (CONCACAF) Gold Cup Final at Soldier Field in Chicago, they were familiar with the common chant that so often echoes throughout the stadium. 1 The Complaint specifies that three of the four Plaintiffs are gay men, while the third was just perceived as being gay - a distinction which has no bearing on the analyses of this matter pursuant to the Illinois Human Rights Act. See 775 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/103(Q). Still, they opted to attend the Gold Cup Final. Plaintiffs did so clad in Team USA jerseys detailed with rainbow-colored numbers, thus associating themselves with the LGBTQ+ community. With the chant in mind, Plaintiffs took a preventative measure in an effort to minimize use of the slur by way of an email to Defendants (though it is unclear which Defendants, specifically) four days prior to the Gold Cup Final. In the email, Plaintiffs advised that they expected intervention should the chant be used, and reminded CONCACAF of the three-step protocol in place for addressing racist and/or discriminatorybehavior, in- cluding chants. CONCACAF's three-step protocol includes: (1) stopping the game See DISPUTE on page 26 Kishner of Herrick, Feinstein LLP 27 COPYRIGHT ( 2023 HACKNEY PUBLICATIONS (HACKNEYPUBLICATIONS.COM)