USADA - Armstrong

[serottasyclist]

Armstrong set foot in the state USADA plenty of times

I would agree with that statement.

 

[python]

I know that some (besides mew, brodeal and susan) see this as cat playing with the doomed mouse

i do too

 

[Benotti69]

Same. Jurisdiction, labor law, due process, court of public opinion, 500, everyone hates me, 5th Circuit Court, what if . . . . Lot's to talk about as the clock ticks down.

Lance has two options:

1. Arbitration (still the most likely, even at this hour on the South Pole)
2. A confession (according to the terms of the USADA) - could be interesting

And there is still the one we were all looking at and didn't see: blindsided.

Last TdF Armstrong raced he got blindsided by a couple of carrots

 

[JRTinMA]

The blog for the 5th circuit court says Lance will appeal it to the 5th circuit court. Other options discussed as well.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/fifth_circ...LawWrit+(FindLaw+News+for+Legal+Professionals)

(Sidebar Lance. If there’s one thing we know about the Fifth Circuit, it’s that the court loves reversing Judge Sam Sparks. It doesn’t seem like Judge Sparks was particularly offensive in this case, but why not appeal to the Fifth Circuit anyway?)

 

[Tubeless]

That is way to risky for Armstrong, because if USADA does everything right and there is no reason they wont, Armstrong is screwed. He wont take that risk.

If Lance chose not to arbitrate, that would give a default judgement against him - and nothing for him to appeal. Much of the evidence would be released by USDA. That would consititute a formal judgement by an official body, label him as a doper with convincing evidence and take immediate effect. That doesn't make any sense.

It also seems the option to appeal Judge Sparks' decision won't do him any good either - unlikely to succeed and he'd need an immediate order of stay from the appeals court to stop the arbitration from proceeding ahead.

So from the three bad options, logically the least bad is to proceeed with the arbitration in a closed hearing format, and try to extend / delay everything - hoping for something to happen later that will save his butte.

As we're all speculating, and soon we should know - what's your guess what he'll do?

 

[QuickStepper]

It would be very difficult for Armstrong to argue that the United States Olympic Committee does not have exclusive jurisdiction of "amateur athletes" under the Amateur Sports Act. It would also be very difficult for Armstrong to argue that USADA is not doing antidoping process pursuant to the mandate of the US Olympic Committee.

The reason it is difficult to make those arguments is that those arguments are arguments that Judge Sparks made when he determined that the Amateur Sports Act applied.

I didn't mean to suggest that every conceivable argument regarding jurisdiction of USADA would either be viable, or that anyone would assert every conceivable jurisdictional issue in the context of arbitration. But likewise, just to use the extreme examples that you mention, I don't think Judge Sparks "determined" those issues conclusively other than for purposes of determining what he expressly held, i.e., that the parties were bound to arbitrate all issues between them based on the contracts Armstrong had signed when he applied for licensing, that the Stevens Act preempted his claims that he needn't arbitrate, and that the court did not, at least not yet without further factual support, have subject matter jurisdiction to consider claims that what the USADA had done and was proposing to do violated Armstrong's constitutional rights, and finally, that even if the court had jurisdiction over the non-due-process claims alleged by Armstrong, the court would refrain from exercising its equitable jurisdiction. Those are the four conclusions reached by the court and that's what supported his decision of dismissal.

Beyond that, I do think that Judge Sparks was pretty clear that whatever challenges Armstrong wanted to raise to USADA's claims that, for example, it has the power to charge mutiple parties in a consolidated case, or that it can charge Armstrong with violations that occurred at a time prior the enactment and adoption of the WADA Code, or that it can sanction him for years prior to the 8 year applicable SOL, are all fair game in the arbitration.

And contrary to LauraLyn's assertion that it take less time for the arbitrators to decide such issues than it took me to write this, I respectfully disagree. I think if these issues are raised, they are going to be treated quite seriously and each party will be given a full opportunity to brief the issues and have them heard, and perhaps even the opportunity to conduct discovery. These issues are so critical to the process that the arbitrators would never treat them so cavalierly or dismiss them out of hand. Otherwise, they'd be doing exactly what Armstrong wants, and it would set up a situation where he might very welll have grounds to refile in federal court and actually have some substance to the claims that his due process rights are being violated. That's exactly the scenario that Sparks' opinion speaks to and it's why (among other reasons) the dismissal was without prejudice to further proceedings being filed in the future.

But then we've gone over this many, many times already, and while LauraLyn obviously isn't new to this forum, it appears she's gotten to the party and missed the prior discussions. Not a criticism of her in any way, just sayin'.

 

[the big ring]

The bog for the 5th circuit court says Lance will appeal it to the 5th circuit court. Other options discussed as well.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/fifth_circ...LawWrit+(FindLaw+News+for+Legal+Professionals)

So, so irony.

 

[JRTinMA]

So, so irony.

You were quick!

 

[the big ring]

You were quick!

Interesting note on that page...

(Sidebar Lance. If there’s one thing we know about the Fifth Circuit, it’s that the court loves reversing Judge Sam Sparks. It doesn’t seem like Judge Sparks was particularly offensive in this case, but why not appeal to the Fifth Circuit anyway? And cross your fingers for Chief Judge Edith Jones. She’s had words with Judge Sparks in the past.

Bog as in Lance would love to bog things down.

 

[will10]

Can Armstrong just not respond? What happens then?

 

[MarkvW]

I've already laid out examples, but let me give a more generic and way overly simplistic example that I'm sure someone will rip apart:

Lets say Angie was born in CA and has lived her entire life in CA. Betty files a lawsuit against Angie in AZ state court, saying that Angie stole $25,000 from her. Angie is served process and told that there is a hearing in the AZ state court. Angie says "this is stupid, I've never been to AZ. I'm not going to show up for this". The AZ state court enters judgement for Betty.

Betty then tries to get a CA court to enforce the judgement against Angie. Angie says "look, that AZ court may have entered a judgment against me for $25,000, but look at this GPS tracking chip that his been planted in me since birth -- I've never set foot in the state of AZ. There is noway that court had jurisdiction over me, so that judgement has no meaning." The CA court (and any court) would agree and refuse to enforce the judgement of the AZ state court b/c that court never had jurisdiction over Angie.

Although district courts need not give foreign state court judgments full faith and credit unless the state court had jurisdiction to render the judgment, this inquiry flows from the Full Faith and Credit Clause itself. As the Supreme Court has explained:

This limitation flows directly from the principles underlying the Full Faith and Credit Clause. It is axiomatic that a judgment must be supported by a proper showing of jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the relevant parties. One State's refusal to enforce a judgment rendered in another State when the judgment is void for lack of jurisdiction merely gives to that judgment the same “credit, validity, and effect” that it would receive in a court of the rendering state.

Your whole hypothetical is based on the full faith and credit clause. The full faith and credit clause has absolutely nothing to do with Lance Armstrong.

Your post is very misleading.

 

[WinterRider]

Here's a line I never thought to see:

"Mark Fabiani, a spokesman for Armstrong, declined immediate comment. "

From this article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/10400300

Were they not expecting this then? You would think they would have planned what to do and what to say when the case was rejected.

Perhaps their new strategy it to cover their eyes and ears and pretend they don't notice what is going on.

 

[ManInFull]

The blog for the 5th circuit court says Lance will appeal it to the 5th circuit court. Other options discussed as well.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/fifth_circ...LawWrit+(FindLaw+News+for+Legal+Professionals)

That would be my guess. I can't see him going to arbitration before he has explored every legal option.

 

[LauraLyn]

Can Armstrong just not respond? What happens then?

He will get a letter in the mail.

 

[Benotti69]

If Lance chose not to arbitrate, that would give a default judgement against him - and nothing for him to appeal. Much of the evidence would be released by USDA. That would consititute a formal judgement by an official body, label him as a doper with convincing evidence and take immediate effect. That doesn't make any sense.

It also seems the option to appeal Judge Sparks' decision won't do him any good either - unlikely to succeed and he'd need an immediate order of stay from the appeals court to stop the arbitration from proceeding ahead.

So from the three bad options, logically the least bad is to proceeed with the arbitration in a closed hearing format, and try to extend / delay everything - hoping for something to happen later that will save his butte.

As we're all speculating, and soon we should know - what's your guess what he'll do?

He is not a normal guy so unlikely to do the normal logical thing.

To go to arbitration means accepting the legitimatecy of USADA and i cant see him doing that.

I expect UCI to come out of nowhere with something to try and stop this again.

 

[L'Etranger]

The blog for the 5th circuit court says Lance will appeal it to the 5th circuit court. Other options discussed as well.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/fifth_circ...LawWrit+(FindLaw+News+for+Legal+Professionals)

Well, strictly the blog says that he should appeal rather than that he will, but it does sound plausible, given how unpalatable the other options are.

 

[python]

The problem for that Blog and the Armstrong groupies is several-fold:

-The article is old
-with 6 hrs left he still did not appeal
-Several more respected sources pointed to the appeal avenue way before the Blog. Even I considered it thermostats likely route.

 

[will10]

He will get a letter in the mail.

Saying what exactly?

 

[serottasyclist]

Although district courts need not give foreign state court judgments full faith and credit unless the state court had jurisdiction to render the judgment, this inquiry flows from the Full Faith and Credit Clause itself. As the Supreme Court has explained:

This limitation flows directly from the principles underlying the Full Faith and Credit Clause. It is axiomatic that a judgment must be supported by a proper showing of jurisdiction over the subject matter and over the relevant parties. One State's refusal to enforce a judgment rendered in another State when the judgment is void for lack of jurisdiction merely gives to that judgment the same “credit, validity, and effect” that it would receive in a court of the rendering state.

Your whole hypothetical is based on the full faith and credit clause. The full faith and credit clause has absolutely nothing to do with Lance Armstrong.

Your post is very misleading.

And there you go.

Do you disagree that if USADA lacks any authority to sanction Armstrong that he would not maintain a right to fight any body's attmept to enforce that sanction? Because, ya know, that was the point of the example.

 

[QuickStepper]

The blog for the 5th circuit court says Lance will appeal it to the 5th circuit court. Other options discussed as well.

http://blogs.findlaw.com/fifth_circ...LawWrit+(FindLaw+News+for+Legal+Professionals)

Very interesting find. All stuff that we've discussed many times here, but there are some new tidbits, like the insider stuff regarding how many times the 5th Cir. has reversed Sparks or his feud with Chief Judge Edith Jones.

The one thing that is not discussed is that many of these options are likely to be mutually exclusive. The premise is that he can appeal to the 5th Circuit and that this will stay the arbitration, such that if he loses his appeal (and also were to lose in the Supreme Court) he could still go back and arbitrate. That scenario only works if (a) USADA agrees to a standstill while the case remains open on appeal, or (b) if the 5th Circuit were to grant a stay of the USADA proceedings pending the outcome of the appeal.

I think it unlikely that USADA would agree and whether the 5th Circuit would or wouldn't grant a stay is really an unknown. I can think of lots of reasons that will be urged for such a stay, but whether they would succeed or not is, I think at best, a 50-50 shot (at least that's my take on it without having done any legal research on the point).

That means though that if the 5th Circuit doesn't issue a stay, and USADA refuses to stand down, and instead proceeds to sanction Armstrong, a whole cascade of events will likely ensue that will be very difficult to unravel or stop, and which could render whatever the 5th Circuit has to say on the subject moot. Of course, that's one of the reasons why the 5th Circuit might issue a stay, but if they don't and Armstrong lets the deadline pass for opting into the arbitration, he could be left with nowhere to go ultimately.

I also don't think the blog says he will appeal to the 5th Cir., just that the blog writer thinks that's probably the most viable approach if Armstrong doesn't want the USADA's claim to be determined on the merits.

The difficult area here that I don't think anyone here in the Clinic has written about yet or considered is that a Notice of Appeal from a judgment of dismissal in federal court may be timely filed (under Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure) "within 30 days after entry of the judgment or order appealed from."

Thus, the deadline of "today" has nothing to do with when Armstrong is permitted to appeal from Judge Sparks' judgment of dismissal. This of course could lead to a situation where USADA doesn't hear from him today, or even next week, and thus proceeds to issue sanctions against him. In the meantime, he appeals, and among the relief he seeks is a TRO and Preliminary Injunction staying the USADA's enforcement of any penalties or sanctions against him until the 5th Circuit can decide the issues on appeal. And that's the very dangerous proposition.

Personally, if I were him, I'd do both. I'd file a notice of appeal and I'd request to appear specially in the arbitration solely for the purpose of first challenging jurisdiction only, and I'd also clearly let USADA know that I intend to appeal Sparks' decision. I don't think AAA would allow this, but then you never know, and it's really up to AAA since it is AAA and the arbitration panel that decides the procedural issues, not USADA acting alone.

 

[JRTinMA]

Very interesting find. All stuff that we've discussed many times here, but there are some new tidbits, like the insider stuff regarding how many times the 5th Cir. has reversed Sparks or his feud with Chief Judge Edith Jones.

The one thing that is not discussed is that many of these options are likely to be mutually exclusive. The premise is that he can appeal to the 5th Circuit and that this will stay the arbitration, such that if he loses his appeal (and also were to lose in the Supreme Court) he could still go back and arbitrate. That scenario only works if (a) USADA agrees to a standstill while the case remains open on appeal, or (b) if the 5th Circuit were to grant a stay of the USADA proceedings pending the outcome of the appeal.

I think it unlikely that USADA would agree and whether the 5th Circuit would or wouldn't grant a stay is really an unknown. I can think of lots of reasons that will be urged for such a stay, but whether they would succeed or not is, I think at best, a 50-50 shot (at least that's my take on it without having done any legal research on the point).

That means though that if the 5th Circuit doesn't issue a stay, and USADA refuses to stand down, and instead proceeds to sanction Armstrong, a whole cascade of events will likely ensue that will be very difficult to unravel or stop, and which could render whatever the 5th Circuit has to say on the subject moot. Of course, that's one of the reasons why the 5th Circuit might issue a stay, but if they don't and Armstrong lets the deadline pass for opting into the arbitration, he could be left with nowhere to go ultimately.

I also don't think the blog says he will appeal to the 5th Cir., just that the blog writer thinks that's probably the most viable approach if Armstrong doesn't want the USADA's claim to be determined on the merits.

I should have written the blog hopes LA appeals to the 5th. I was implying that is what the writer believes he will do. Thanks for the additional input as well, good stuff.

 

[GotDropped]

Maybe I don't understand enough about the US legal system, but are you trying to say that Armstrong has a chip implanted that shows he's never been to Austin or been a professional cyclist?

It's in the sack where the ball used to be.

 

[Benotti69]

It's in the sack where the ball used to be.

........

 

[eyemgh]

Can Armstrong just not respond? What happens then?

He will get a lifetime sporting ban and his previous victories will be expunged. From there, he can appeal to CAS.

What's interesting is if and when the details of the USADA case will be revealed if he chooses not to contend, but then moves straight to CAS for appeal.

No matter what, he's basically screwed. All who love LA love Georgie too. When it's revealed that he talked, very few will be blind enough to believe that Lance was clean.

M

 

[MacRoadie]

No filing as of yet with the 5th Circuit:

No case found with the search criteria:
Name: Armstrong, Lance (pty)