The most interesting comments on the Donald Sterling/Clippers situation are coming from Sterling’s wife and her attorney as they fight to retain her ownership stake in the team. In an ABC interview, Shelly Sterling asked a provocative question: “I will fight that decision. To be honest with you, I’m wondering if a wife of one of the owners, and there’s 30 owners, did something like that, said those racial slurs, would they oust the husband? Or would they leave the husband in?”
The NBA claims the authority (from its own Constitution) to oust both of the Sterlings as Clippers owners because of what Donald said in a private conversation. Now the NBA is extending its authority to Donald’s wife, who wasn’t even part of the conversation. Really?
But the best comment came from Pierce O’Donnell, Shelly Sterling’s attorney: “We do not agree with the league’s self-serving interpretation of its constitution, its application to Shelly Sterling or its validity under these unique circumstances,” O’Donnell said. “We live in a nation of laws. California law and the United States Constitution trump any such interpretation.” He has a point, but he is not fighting the NBA’s decision to remove Donald over an illegally recorded conversation. California law and the US Constitution protect both Donald and Shelly.
Unless there’s a quiet settlement, the arguments in this case will get very interesting. There’s too much hypocrisy to sweep under the rug.
Stirling is losing the team because he said some stupid things in a fight with his gold digger girlfriend. She records private conversations illegally and is a hero. His wife did nothing but will lose her share of the team. All of this is done in the name of justice. Something isn’t right here.
What?? Why should she pay for what her husband did? The guy explained to his friend who taped him the circumstances under which the things were said. He said something like:” I was trying to play with the girl. I was trying to have sex with her” (with his mistress). And his wife should pay for that???
It is interesting the sides people take. It seems to me that those most distressed about Mrs. Stirling losing her interest in the team by no fault or choosing of her own in the name of “best interest of the league” are completely comfortable with people loosing their healthcare by no fault or choosing of their own in the name of Obamacare.
Welcome to the real world Aliza! It’s not right that ignorant private comments from person A should lead to forfeiture of a business by person B just because group C is offended. NBA players are very comfortable with punishing the entire Sterling family, not just the person. This is exactly what Donald Sterling did when he extended his comments to an entire race. If you don’t have a problem with punishing someone for bad thoughts or private comments, sooner or later you’ll be the one getting attacked!
Punishing the entire family for one person’s crime is legitimate in North Korea.