NFL Seeking Summary Judgement In Colin Kaepernick Collusion Case

The NFL is asking arbitrator Stephen Burbank to issue a summary judgement in Colin Kaepernick‘s collusion lawsuit against the league, according to Charles Robinson of Yahoo Sports. Burbank’s next move will decide the future of the case: if he accepts the NFL’s request, the case will end, but if Burbank denies the league, Kaepernick’s grievance will move forward.

As Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk explains, the NFL is hoping to force Kaepernick to “put his cards on the table.” Kaepernick and his legal team will need to prove they have enough evidence of collusion to continue the lawsuit, meaning the former 49ers quarterback will likely deploy any and all “smoking guns” he has on hand. If Kaepernick does so, the league will then have an idea of his team’s trial plan.

Burbank’s summary judgement will be the “most pivotal moment” in Kaepernick’s case, per Robinson, as the arbitrator’s decision will decide the future of the lawsuit. However, law requires all facts to be viewed “in the most favorable light” towards Kaepernick, according to Florio, meaning he shouldn’t have a tough time forcing the case to continue.

Kaepernick, of course, has not played in the NFL since 2016, as clubs have shunned the former 30-year-old following his national anthem demonstrations. While he was scheduled to work out for the Seahawks earlier this year, the audition was eventually canceled after Kaepernick declined to stop kneeling during the anthem.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

View Comments (27)
newest oldest

27 comments on “NFL Seeking Summary Judgement In Colin Kaepernick Collusion Case

  1. sportsfan101

    Kap is a good for the NFL as PED’s. Enough said

    1
    0
  2. adamontheshore

    I think it’s hard to argue that he would not have a job if it wasn’t for his political actions. I hope he wins.

    0
    0
      • Richard Hangslow

        He’s free to sign in Canada where his Anti American act will be ignored.

        0
        0
        • RenoChris

          His act is very American. We have rights, join ISIS if you want to tell everyone how to live their lives.

          1
          0
          • mmflaw

            I agree. While I think players not standing for the national anthem is sad and misguided this is America. They have an absolute right to protest non violently.

            0
            0
          • afsooner02

            And employers have rights too, just like employees. And if your actions are going to cost them profits then it is their right to say “no thank you” despite how good you are.

            You certainly have freedom of speech, but that doesn’t mean you have the freedom of the consequences of that speech.

            2
            0
            • carlos15

              Correct, exercising free speech during the course of employment can have consequences. And if teams don’t want to deal with the distraction that that causes that is well within their rights. It’s doubtful they specifically colluded on that point but it is likely none of them wanted to take on that distraction for a backup quarterback who still wanted to be paid like a starter. The benefits of signing him just don’t outweigh the negatives.

              1
              0
              • brucewayne

                It’s still not collusion if no teams wanted to employ him because of his actions! They have that right

                1
                0
                  • brucewayne

                    and make that part of getting hired . That’s not illegal !

                    0
                    0
          • Chris Tschirgi

            I think you need to study the definition of RIGHTS & PRIVELEDGES and understand the differences as well as whether or not a person has the right to infringe on another person’s right. Also, Isis? You think it goes from America-Isis on the spectrum? Smh. People truly don’t understand how lucky we R to be in America. Its like people have an expectation its either perfect or its terrible and racist and oppressing and unfair.

            0
            0
    • daman2032

      The whole thing is he is going to have to prove that owners planned and worked together to keep him out of the league. If each owner came to that decision based on not wanting to lose fans then their is no collusion.

      0
      0
    • Chris Tschirgi

      Blame the media. If they would all agree not to interview a backup qb OR any teammates with ANY ?’s about said backup qb UNLESS or only if he becomes starter. Dude no backup qb is worth all that drama. Backup qb’s can go 12 years without being interviewed and nobody cares. Stop saying his talent has nothing to do with it. If he was good enough to be a starter, somebody would deal with the “extra” but hes not. Hes not accurate, he doesn’throw a good ball as he has no touch and everything is 100mph, and he doesent read defenses. His claim to fame including like 200yd RUSHING performances-not picking apart defenses, ideally he would be a desirable backup qb to have—if the media wouldnt stick a mic in his face and in his teammates faces looking for sound bytes and clicks, but they will EVERY SINGLE DAY

      0
      0
  3. Juice1717

    Renochris…….please spare me with your rights. When youre working can you show protests? Why is it your right to protest while working while on someone elses platform? Thats a dumb comment

    0
    0
  4. willthathrill

    Just another idiot who doesnt know when to keep his mouth shut, hope he loses this!

    0
    0
  5. Ironman_4life

    Common sense has to outweigh everyones political views. Employers have a right to hire whoever they want. Pretty simple.

    0
    0
  6. forwhomjoshbelltolls

    Partisanship is a form of mental illness.

    The same people who have been screaming for two years about an employer’s right to hire and fire whom they please in regards to Kaepernick started screaming about First Amendment rights when Roseanne was fired.

    Conversely, the people who understood why she was fired think Kaepernick is entitled to an NFL job.

    0
    1
    • Ironman_4life

      I disagree. Im a conservative and i think roseanne screwed up big time. Freedom of speech does not pertain to a private entity.

      0
      0
  7. Dodgethis

    Can we use an image without a filter? Kaep is white, not oily fake black.

    0
    0
  8. crosseyedlemon

    Why would the lawyers on either side of this case want an early resolution? The public attention this case receives can only help their careers and the longer they draw proceedings out the more they will earn.

    0
    0
  9. ‘Murica, where you’re not allowed to express your right of freedom, because it apparently disrespects those who.. fought for that right of freedom in the first place.

    No one has ever accused the US of being logical, I guess.

    0
    0

Leave a Reply