Latest news with #ShermanAct
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
NCAA responds to Zakai Zeigler lawsuit seeking to play another season on Rocky Top
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (WATE) — The National Collegiate Athletic Association filed a response to Zakai Zeigler's motion for a preliminary injunction in his lawsuit where he is seeking to play a fifth season at the University of Tennessee. Zeigler sued the NCAA, saying that its rule that only allows players to compete for four seasons within a five-year window violates antitrust laws. His attorneys requested a preliminary injunction that would allow him to play in the 2025-2026 season. Vols season on the line after falling to Wake Forest in regional final An attorney for the NCAA filed a response to this injunction saying that Zeigler was only able to play in the first place because an older athlete exhausted his eligibility and left the team. Similarly, if Zeigler plays for another season, it will prevent a graduating high school senior from taking his spot, the response said. The attorneys argued that Zeigler would be playing, 'at the expense of another student-athlete who would otherwise have the opportunity to take his place.' The response also argued that the Sherman Act, an antitrust law, only applies to commercial competition and that NCAA's eligibility requirements are non-commercial. Milling and paving of Fort Sanders roads begins Monday 'The higher education community itself contends that discarding the NCAA's time-based eligibility rules would undermine the educational missions of NCAA member institutions,' the response said. The response makes other arguments as well such as saying that an expert for the plaintiff 'is not credible' and that the rules don't harm consumer welfare. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
The Lone Star State — and Trump — versus BlackRock
The Trump administration has waded into a politically charged Texas-led legal fight to dilute US financial giants' alleged influence over corporate America. Last week, the US Justice Department and the US Federal Trade Commission filed a joint "statement of interest" siding with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and 10 other Republican-led states in an antitrust case against trillion-dollar asset managers BlackRock (BLK) and its rivals State Street (STT) and Vanguard. The charge: Using their substantial stock holdings, BlackRock and its rival financial firms coordinated a "left-wing ideological" attack on US coal companies, pressuring coal producers Arch Coal, Black Hills, and Peabody to cut coal production in the South Powder River Basin and thermal coal markets, the DOJ and FTC said in the court filing. The decreased output, they said, harmed US consumers by artificially inflating energy prices. "Carbon reduction is no more a defense to the conduct alleged here than it would be to price fixing among airlines that reduced the number of carbon-emitting flights," the DOJ and FTC said in the statement supporting the states' claims. The states allege that the financial firms agreed to reduce output through commitments to carbon-reduction organizations Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative and Climate Action 100+. They also say disclosures from the defendants and public statements show that they engaged directly with coal company executives in efforts to influence production levels, and they used their voting power when engagement fell short of meeting those goals. As large yet minority shareholders, the complaint claims, the defendants have more influence than their formal equity share. The actions extend beyond shareholder advocacy and passive investing by furthering their own "green energy" or net-zero goals, rather than the goals of the coal corporations, in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and Section 7 of the Clayton Act, the challengers claim. The agencies' effort to have the administration's perspective considered in the case, despite not being a party to the dispute, has drawn criticism from the defendants and others. On Wednesday, Campaign for Accountability (CfA), a nonpartisan nonprofit watchdog organization, accused the administration of targeting the money managers for political rather than law enforcement reasons. The group filed a Freedom of Information Act Request asking the agencies to disclose communications underlying their decision to weigh in on the case. CfA was co-founded in 2015 by Anne Weismann, former head counsel for the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. "This case isn't about antitrust law, but about conservative opposition to even recognizing the risks of climate change," CfA executive director Michelle Kuppersmith said. "Americans deserve to know who is influencing the FTC to use its antitrust authority to attack political opponents." Meanwhile, Derek Mountford, an antitrust partner at Gunster, said the lawsuit's rhetoric also signals political motivation. But, he added, it could ultimately answer an unsettled antitrust question over how competition law applies to the actions of asset managers with significant ownership interests in competing companies. Should asset managers and index fund providers, for example, be treated differently under the law than individuals and businesses that offer products and services and control multiple firms within a singular market? "If one individual owns a significant interest in three competing companies, alarm bells start going off in your head that there could be some anticompetitive conduct going on," Mountford said. Although the BlackRock scenario isn't as cut and dried, he said, concerns have been bubbling about the competitive role that institutional shareholders are allowed to play, compared to companies and suppliers that can more directly influence market competition. "This case is going to represent a much clearer answer to that question than I think we've gotten in any other case of its kind," Mountford said. BlackRock asked for a judge to dismiss the case and accused the administration of trying to "re-write" antitrust law under an "absurd" theory that the coal companies conspired with them to reduce production outputs. "Forcing asset managers to divest from coal companies will harm their ability to access capital and invest in their businesses and employees, likely leading to higher energy prices," the company said in a statement. BlackRock CEO Larry Fink made a series of disengagements from the company's environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives as bipartisan concerns spread over the financial giant's power to sway US markets. Fink publicly stated in June 2023 that he would cease using the politically sensitive acronym "ESG" because it had been "weaponized" by both the ideological right and the left. In January, before President Trump took office, the financial giant cut ties with UN-backed Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative (NZAM), an environmental advocacy group that pledged net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. The administration's legal filing came roughly six months after a GOP-controlled House Judiciary Committee issued a report accusing the three money managers of using their financial clout to force US coal companies to "decarbonize" and reach net zero. According to the report, the money managers forced coal companies to disclose and reduce carbon emissions through negotiations, stockholder proxy resolutions, and the replacement of directors at "recalcitrant companies." Democrats have also criticized the financial firms' outsized influence over US markets, but for different reasons. Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.), a vocal critic of the megamanagers' influence, described the group's stock ownership in 95% of S&P 500 (^GSPC) companies an "oligarchy." Sanders, along with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) also criticized BlackRock for declining to use its weight to intervene in a coal mining labor dispute. Gunster's Mountford said the federal government's decision to weigh in on a state AG-initiated case is unusual but becoming increasingly more prevalent. "It's not something that courts have had to wrestle with, where you have the DOJ weighing in on these types of cases," he said. "It's a pretty new phenomenon, and it's one that Trump sort of pioneered ... and continued during the Biden administration." "I think," he added, "it's here to stay." Alexis Keenan is a legal reporter for Yahoo Finance. Follow Alexis on X @alexiskweed.
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
FTC Launches Initial Stage Of Investigation Of Media Matters Over Elon Musk's Ad Boycott Claims
UPDATED, with Media Matters comment: The Federal Trade Commission has launched the initial stages of an investigation into Media Matters, the progressive media watchdog group that has been targeted by one of Donald Trump's top allies, Elon Musk. Reuters first reported that the FTC sent a civil investigative demand letter to Media Matters, seeking information on its contacts with a World Federation of Advertisers initiative called Global Alliance for Responsible Media, as well as other groups. More from Deadline Donald Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' Passes House By One Vote Martina McBride Urges Passage Of Bill To Curb AI Deepfakes In Latest Industry Push For Congressional Action Donald Trump Says Comcast "Ought To Be Investigated" After Peter Alexander Asks POTUS Question About Qatar's Gifting Of A $400 Million Jet Angelo Carusone, president of Media Matters, said in a statement, 'The Trump administration has been defined by naming right-wing media figures to key posts and abusing the power of the federal government to bully political opponents and silence critics. It's clear that's exactly what's happening here, given Media Matters' history of holding those same figures to account. These threats won't work; we remain steadfast to our mission.' An FTC spokesperson declined to comment. Musk's X sued Media Matters in 2023 after it published a report on the placement of advertisements on the platform next to pro-Nazi and other objectionable content. A number of advertisers announced that they were pausing their placements on X, although there also was attention at the time to one of Musk's posts, in which he endorsed an antisemitic conspiracy theory. He later said that it was 'one of the dumbest' of his posts, while telling advertisers who left to 'go f— themselves.' Media Matters countersued in California, alleging that Musk was forum shopping and out to punish the organization for its speech, per Reuters. Both lawsuits are pending. Musk also sued advertisers that fled his platform, claiming that boycotts violated antitrust laws. The World Federation of Advertisers was named in the lawsuit. The opening of an inquiry is not a surprise: FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson, a Trump appointee, had signaled that he would look into advertiser boycotts – and the exodus from X in particular – before he took the top post at the agency. 'Shortly after Twitter (now X) was purchased by a free speech champion, major advertisers raced for the door and refused to advertise on X. Concerted refusals to deal — also known as group boycotts — are illegal under the Sherman Act,' Ferguson said. Ferguson also suggested that NewsGuard, a non-partisan media rating site used by advertisers to weigh brand safety of news content sites, could be violating antitrust laws. NewsGuard has said that such government pressure threatens to chill speech protected by the First Amendment. In March, Trump fired the FTC's two Democratic commissioners, Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Kelly Slaughter. They are challenging his actions in court. Best of Deadline Every 'The Voice' Winner Since Season 1, Including 9 Team Blake Champions Everything We Know About 'Jurassic World: Rebirth' So Far 'Nine Perfect Strangers' Season 2 Release Schedule: When Do New Episodes Come Out?
Fox Sports
21-05-2025
- Business
- Fox Sports
Zakai Zeigler suing NCAA; what impact could ruling have on future eligibility?
Two-time SEC defensive player of the year Zakai Zeigler is suing the NCAA over rules limiting him to four seasons in a five-year window as an unlawful restraint of trade under both federal and Tennessee laws. Zeigler's lawsuit was filed Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. The point guard played four seasons at Tennessee, leading the Volunteers to consecutive Elite Eight berths before graduating earlier this month. The Vols went 109-36 during Zeigler's time with the school. He was a third-team All-American this season, which ended with Tennessee's loss to eventual national runner-up Houston in the Elite Eight. "We have requested a preliminary injunction to allow Zakai to compete in the upcoming season while pursuing his graduate studies," according to a statement from the Garza Law Firm and Litson PLLC. "We look forward to a swift resolution of this matter so that Zakai can begin preparing for next season." The NCAA said in a statement the association fully supports athletes profiting from name, image and likeness along with other benefits and is working for such reforms, which includes a proposed $2.8 billion settlement of an antitrust lawsuit. "A patchwork of different state laws, executive orders and court opinions make it challenging for any league to operate on a fair playing field, including at the conference level and that's why partnering with Congress to develop a national standard would provide stability for student-athletes and schools everywhere," the NCAA said. This latest lawsuit against the NCAA notes Zeigler "diligently completed his undergraduate degree in four years" and graduated this month. That makes Zeigler's lawsuit different from athletes who started careers at junior colleges or lower-division NCAA schools and are seeking a fifth season. Yet the NCAA rule limiting athletes to four seasons during a five-year window keeps Zeigler from playing a fifth season and earning NIL money in "the most lucrative year of the eligibility window for the vast majority of athletes," according to the lawsuit. How much could Zeigler earn in a fifth season with the Vols? The lawsuit says between $2 million and $4 million for 2025-26, given his record and visibility playing in the SEC and based on projections from the Spyre Sports Group, the NIL collective associated with the university. Athletes who redshirt or take five years to finish an undergraduate degree can earn NIL money each of their five years. The lawsuit also points to the NCAA's redshirt system controlling who gets access to a fifth year of eligibility. The lawsuit asks that the NCAA rule be declared a violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and Tennessee's Trade Practices Act. If Zeigler were to win the lawsuit, it would set an unprecedented standard for athletes pursuing a fifth season of eligibility. Just six months ago, Vanderbilt quarterback Diego Pavia filed a lawsuit against the NCAA, arguing his junior college eligibility should not count against his Division I eligibility. Like in Zeigler's case, the argument centered around the NCAA placing a cap on his potential NIL compensation. A judge granted Pavia a preliminary injunction, allowing him an extra year of eligibility, which he is set to use in the upcoming 2025 college football season. This is a developing story. The Associated Press contributed to this story. Want great stories delivered right to your inbox? Create or log in to your FOX Sports account, follow leagues, teams and players to receive a personalized newsletter daily ! recommended Get more from College Basketball Follow your favorites to get information about games, news and more in this topic
San Francisco Chronicle
20-05-2025
- Sport
- San Francisco Chronicle
Zakai Zeigler, SEC's 2-time defensive player of year, suing NCAA to play 5th season in 5 years
Two-time Southeastern Conference defensive player of the year Zakai Zeigler is suing the NCAA over rules limiting him to four seasons in a five-year window as an unlawful restraint of trade under both federal and Tennessee laws. Zeigler's lawsuit was filed Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. The point guard played four seasons at Tennessee, helping the Volunteers to consecutive Elite Eight berths before graduating earlier this month. The Vols went 109-36 during Zeigler's time with the school. Zeigler was a third-team All-American this season, which ended with Tennessee's loss to eventual national runner-up Houston in the Elite Eight on March 30. 'We have requested a preliminary injunction to allow Zakai to compete in the upcoming season while pursuing his graduate studies,' according to a statement from the Garza Law Firm and Litson PLLC. 'We look forward to a swift resolution of this matter so that Zakai can begin preparing for next season.' The NCAA said in a statement the association fully supports athletes profiting from name, image and likeness along with other benefits and is working for such reforms, which includes a proposed $2.8 billion settlement of an antitrust lawsuit. "A patchwork of different state laws, executive orders and court opinions, make it challenging for any league to operate on a fair playing field, including at the conference level and that's why partnering with Congress to develop a national standard would provide stability for student-athletes and schools everywhere,' the NCAA said. This latest lawsuit against the NCAA notes Zeigler 'diligently completed his undergraduate degree in four years' and graduated this month. That makes Zeigler's lawsuit different from athletes who started careers at junior colleges or lower-division NCAA schools and are seeking a fifth season. Yet the NCAA rule limiting athletes to four seasons during a five-year window keeps Zeigler from playing a fifth season and earning NIL money in 'the most lucrative year of the eligibility window for the vast majority of athletes,' according to the lawsuit. How much could Zeigler could earn in a fifth season with the Vols? The lawsuit says between $2 million and $4 million for 2025-26, given his record and visibility playing in the Southeastern Conference and based on projections from the Spyre Sports Group, the NIL collective associated with the university. Athletes who redshirt or take five years to finish an undergraduate degree can earn NIL money each of their five years. The lawsuit also points to the NCAA's redshirt system controlling who gets access to a fifth year of eligibility. The lawsuit asks that the NCAA rule be declared a violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and Tennessee's Trade Practices Act.
