Harbaugh v. Big Ten alumni amicus brief

Submitted by rym on November 12th, 2023 at 7:21 PM

The law firm Rushing McCarl LLP, in partnership with local counsel, is writing a pro bono amicus brief supporting the University of Michigan’s efforts to block the Big Ten’s suspension of Head Coach Jim Harbaugh. We believe the suspension violates Big Ten rules while endangering the Wolverines’ pursuit of a Big Ten title and national championship.

Amicus briefs are submitted by nonparties whose point of view could be helpful to the court. This brief is a grassroots, fan-driven effort intended to share the perspective of Michigan alumni who love the football program. Its author is the California-based litigation firm Rushing McCarl LLP, which was co-founded by Michigan alum Ryan McCarl. The brief will be co-signed by many other alumni who choose to add their names to the brief.

Michigan sports programs help alumni across the world come together and stay connected with the university, so we should have our voices heard in this lawsuit. Our brief will help the court understand why Michigan athletics are so important to so many people. Important interests are at stake: Michigan’s concerns about the Harbaugh suspension can’t be brushed away as involving “just sports,” “just a few games,” or “just one coach.” Coach Harbaugh should be on the sidelines when Michigan collects its 1,000th program win and defeats Ohio State for the third straight year en route to another Big Ten title.

If you’re a degree-receiving U of M alum interested in signing on as a supporter of the brief, please fill out this form: http://bit.ly/harbaughbrief. You can contact the attorneys writing the brief by emailing goblue[at]rushingmccarl.com (though we cannot respond to every email).

Please also help us spread the word about this effort by sharing the link to the form with your networks. Go Blue!

MGoBoard
Football
#SignGate
#harbaugh

KSmooth

November 12th, 2023 at 9:10 PM ^

You have room for an Illinois law grad?

Might help to have an alum from another law school.  I've been out of practice for a while but I'm still licensed in MI.

Joined: 11/14/2009

MGoPoints: 3783

Carcajou

November 12th, 2023 at 10:10 PM ^

 

  • So observing, analyzing, and relaying opponent's signs  during a game: legal
  • Recording, filing away opponents for future reference: legal
  • Conveying and receiving such information to coaches and staffs of other schools, including opponent' upcoming opponents: legal
  • Acquiring inside information on opponent's offense, defense, and special teams including schemes and signals by hiring a former coach, staff member or former player: legal
  • Acquiring inside information on opponent's offense, defense, and special teams including schemes and signals by acquiring through graduate transfers or portal: legal
  • Observing or recording signs  or signals of a future opponent in person by fans not-hired by the university during opponents game (which could easily be relayed to coaches or staff) legal [in the absence of a direct request or quid pro quo]: legal
  • Yet observing or recording signs  or signals of a future opponent in person during opponent's game: illegal

Seems to be incredibly arbitrary to carve out this one archaic thirty-year old exception (in-person scouting and using electronic media) for reasons that are obsolete (now that recording equipment and access to video files is ubiquitous) or irrelevant (as it was a rule to protect schools with lesser means who could not afford to send as many in-game scouts, when certainly all B1G teams have the budgets to cover this). 

And with news of this "scandal" afoot why wouldn't some unaffiliated group of fans (or enemies) of one school ask for volunteers to record signals, and upload them to a website or ftp server, which coaches or staff members of one or more schools could be alerted to anonymously, clarifying that these offerings were unsolicited?

As I understand it, the U.S. is a common law country, meaning that the letter of the law is not always the final word: following and setting precedence and examining and sometimes overturning unreasonable or unjust laws if a large part of the justice system.

It only makes sense to do one or the other: either sign-stealing is legal, and allow it to happen in whatever form, and put the onus on each time to hide. protect, change their own signs; or make it illegal, and make coaches, players, and staff sign pledges not to attempt or engage in such information, nor to communicate to coaches or players on the field during the game signs and signals of the opponent, subject to penalties and ejections.

While I might prefer the latter, I doubt many would go along this, and enforcement would be extremely difficult to enforce.

Joined: 02/26/2009

MGoPoints: 5796

mgoblue78

November 12th, 2023 at 11:10 PM ^

Love the idea in the abstract. But in reality, I'm not associating my name with a court filing, I've not read. Sure, cobbler's kids go barefoot but this MGOBlog JD ain't putting 45+ years of bar membership on that line. Sorry

Joined: 12/15/2011

MGoPoints: 6664

rym

November 13th, 2023 at 1:14 AM ^

That's of course understandable, especially for an attorney. We've attracted over 540 alumni signatures already on a Sunday evening within hours of announcing the brief, so we're grateful for the trust that a lot of people are putting in our firm. They won't be disappointed in our work. But we understand that not everyone can sign.

Joined: 09/07/2019

MGoPoints: 1676