League asking court to uphold lockout
NFL attorney David Boies fields a question outside a federal courthouse last month. Credit: AP
The NFL and its players awaited word from a federal appeals court Monday on whether the on-again, off-again lockout is off again. Or whether it's still on.
The league Monday morning filed a brief with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, which is deciding whether to issue a permanent stay to an injunction to lift the lockout that was granted by a lower court last week. The appeals court isn't expected to take long to decide the issue, and the outcome could be a major factor in whether the league resumes operations or remains dormant while its labor dispute drags on.
A three-member panel of the appeals court voted 2-1 Friday to grant a temporary stay of the injunction while it considered whether to issue a permanent stay that would last until the full appeal is heard. The appeal is likely to last until at least mid-June.
If the court does not approve a permanent stay, the NFL likely will resume operations, as it did briefly Friday. The league's 32 teams opened their doors Friday morning, allowing players to return, but ordered the doors closed again less than 12 hours later after the appeals court's decision on the temporary stay. If the court approves a stay until the appeal is completed, the lockout likely will remain in place until June.
In its brief, the league questioned the argument that only players suffer harm during a lockout, and even quoted some players who were enjoying time off as a result of the lockout.
"To me, this is probably the greatest window of opportunity I've ever had in my life," Ravens linebacker Ray Lewis said in a recent interview. "It's been 25 years of my life that I've never had a summer to myself."
Patriots receiver Wes Welker, who also is enjoying time off from the usual grind of New England's offseason conditioning program, said, "Let's do a lockout every year."
The league also argued that it would be in a difficult position if forced to open for business and conduct player transactions. On one hand, the court would be ordering the league to impose new work rules, but on the other hand, those work rules might be exposed to antitrust violations.
More football news
