About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

2 Prof. Sports & L. 1 (2011-2012)

handle is hein.journals/profsptla2 and id is 1 raw text is: Route To: PROFESSIONAL SI March-April 20110 Volume 2, Issue 1 and the Baseball, Drug Testing, and the Fourth Amendment By Alan J. French and Ryan M. Rodenberg he so-called Steroid Era in Major League Baseball (MLB) has left an indelible footprint on the sport. Over the course of the past decade, MLB and its players have appeared before Congress on multiple occasions and been compelled to deal with possible government oversight in connection with the league's doping protocol. While these events have brought a negative stigma to the game, baseball has finallywon an important legal battle against the government. In a case of apparent first impression, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently decided a multi-pronged dispute that dealt with the Fourth Amendment's search and seizure language in the context ofbaseball's drug testing program. In December 2010, lawyers for the United States decided not to appeal the September 2010 en banc rul- See Baseball, Drug Testing on Page 18 Florida Supreme Court Rebuffs Citizens he Florida Supreme Court has affirmed a lower court's ruling that validated the issuance ofbonds by Sarasota County and the City ofSarasota, ameasure the municipalities undertook to entice the Baltimore Orioles to hold its spring training in Sarasota. The municipalities had entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Orioles, which obligated the munici- palities to renovate a stadium complex with funds raised through the issuance of bonds. In exchange, the team would, among other things, relocate to Sarasota for spring training. In a bid to prevent the use of public funds as an enticement, the Sarasota Citizens for Responsible Government, et al. sued, alleging, as previously reported in Sports Litigation Alert (http://www.hackneypubli- cations.com/sla/archive/00 1 002.php), that the deliberations to bring the Orioles to Sarasota were in a 'dark back room' despite being advertised by the County Commis- sioners as a public meeting. The group claimed that the County Commissioners sidestepped Florida open government lawby shielding the public from having a voice in the decision to bring the Orioles to Sarasota. After a trial court ruled for the defendants, the plaintiffs appealed, claiming that the trial court erred when ruling that a deputy county administrator and the individuals he consulted in negotiating with the team (the so-called negotiations team) were not a board or commission subject to the Sunshine Law. The state Supreme Court sided with See Florida Supreme on Page 17 Court Finds Applicability of CBA Guts Football Players' Claims COPYRIGHT (c) 2011 HACKNEY PUBLICATIONS (HACK NEY P UBLICATION S.CM) 20

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most