Sports Law Blog
All things legal relating
to the sports world...
Wednesday, December 09, 2009
 
Congress and the BCS

Yesterday, a subcommittee of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce passed H.R. 390, which prohibits the "promot[ion], market[ing], or advertis[ing]" of a post-season Division I college football game as a national championship game unless it is the final game of a single-elimination post-season playoff tournament rather than the current BCS system. It also prohibits the sale, marketing, or advertising of merchandise related to a national-championship game unless it is for the final game of a single-elimination playoff tournament. The Federal Trade Commission is given enforcement jurisdiction, with the practices prohibited in the act treated as unfair or deceptive trade practices.

The obvious reaction is to wonder whether Congress has anything better to do. Not because Congress cannot do many things at once--as co-sponsor Bobby Rush said, "We can walk and chew gum at the same time"--but because I am not sure why there is a sufficient national public interest to warrant congressional action.

My broader reaction is to wonder whether there is a First Amendment problem here. The bill clearly tries to limit itself to commercial speech--selling, marketing, advertising--that receives less (although still significant) First Amendment protection. Commercial speech can be restricted if it is untruthful or misleading and then is essentially subject to intermediate scrutiny--it must directly serve a substantial government interest and must regulate no more extensively than necessary to serve that interest. But is it "untruthful" or "misleading" to call the upcoming BCS Championship Game between Alabama and Texas a "championship" game (or to call the winner of that game "National Champion" simply because Congress or the FTC does not like the process used to decide the game's participants? This is not like the FTC prohibiting Tylenol from saying it cures cancer or prohibiting OxyClean from saying one use and you'll never have to clean your whites again or prohibiting Nike from directly stating that these new sneakers will enable you to run a two-hour marathon--empirically dubious claims, all. Plus, I am not sure what substantial government interest is at stake here; it does not appear to be public health, safety, or welfare--unless you happen to be a fan of TCU or Boise State.

Plus, this may come close to regulating fully-protected non-commercial speech. The prohibition on sales of merchandise "related to" a non-playoff national championship game would reach, for example, selling hats and t-shirts that say "Alabama/Texas 2009 National Champion." But the fact that something expressive (in this case the hat with the National Champion message) is sold does not make it commercial speech; the seller in this example is engaged in the sale of non-commercial expressive material and the attempt to regulate that sale should be subject to regular First Amendment scrutiny. And obviously the FTC cannot prohibit people from wearing merchandise pronouncing Texas/Alabama as National Champion based on victory in a BCS-based game. Nor can it prohibit the University of Alabama from, say, introducing its team as National Champions, hanging a National Champion banner on its stadium, or wearing special jerseys that say "National Champions." Any such effort would, it seems to me, plainly violate the First Amendment.

All of which calls into question why the bill takes the approach it does. Given the strong interstate commerce connections of collegiate sports, it seems that Congress could directly compel the NCAA and its members to adopt a playoff. It also could have attached a playoff system as a condition on federal funds (which every NCAA member school receives). So it seems odd to incentivize the NCAA into adopting a playoff by going after expression. Seems like what the First Amendment is designed to prevent.





13 Comments:

I agree wholeheartedly with what you say in your article, and as one of the few BCS supporters around, I'm a little dubious about this. As a 1L, I haven't had the chance to take antitrust law, and I'm relying on what little I had as an undergraduate. I was wondering if Congress may have had a better leg to stand on by attacking the BCS from an antitrust standpoint. It seems like there might be a case to be made under section one of the sherman act by the rule of reason? If someone could prove that the BCS is an agreement between at least two parties as opposed to an NCAA rule, that the BCS adversely affects competition in college football, and that there is an anticompetitive effect which outweighs any procompetitive benefits. It seems like one could make arguments for each of the three above elements. Would this be a possible/better route to take by Congress than the one mentioned in your article?

Blogger Jeremy -- 12/10/2009 2:10 AM  


Blogs are so informative where we get lots of information on any topic. Nice job keep it up!!
_____________________________

Doctoral Dissertation

Blogger marry -- 12/10/2009 6:09 AM  


Interesting discussion on the First Amendment. In reality, Congress is attempting to take the easiest way to address the issue by essentially trying to legislate from the "fraud" angle rather than withholding federal funds angle which would be my preference. In fact, the latter is done all the time in other contexts though most of us would call that extortion.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 12/10/2009 6:19 AM  


It's just politics.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 12/10/2009 7:40 AM  


Howard:

Good points. Let me thrown a few more shots at this legislation. First, exactly what is "false and misleading" as yo ucorrectly point out. Second, the application of the Central Hudson test, which still governs commercial speech has evolved over the years to an "intermediate scrutiny plus" standard. Even if there is a substantial governmental interest here (which I question and think the whole exercise is a waste of time), then the legislation must "directly advance" that interest and cannot be more restrictive than necessary. I doubt this legislation would pass that test. And Commercial speech gets less protection than non-advertising speech!

Blogger Mark Conrad -- 12/10/2009 6:12 PM  


Please come visit my site Resource Guide Miami Florida FL when you got time.

Blogger rr8004 -- 12/21/2009 5:28 AM  


Please come visit my site Local Business Directory Miami when you got time.

Blogger rr8004 -- 12/21/2009 5:29 AM  


. Since I’m new to blogging, these articles are greatly appreciated; very useful and informative blog and every body must visit this blog. Please come visit my site Charlotte Business Directory when you got time

Blogger rr8004 -- 12/28/2009 2:09 AM  


. Since I’m new to blogging, these articles are greatly appreciated; very useful and informative blog and every body must visit this blog. Please come visit my site Business Directory Charlotte when you got time

Blogger rr8004 -- 12/28/2009 2:10 AM  


Affiliate Marketing is a performance based sales technique used by companies to expand their reach into the internet at low costs. This commission based program allows affiliate marketers to place ads on their websites or other advertising efforts such as email distribution in exchange for payment of a small commission when a sale results.

www.onlineuniversalwork.com

Blogger davidbaer -- 1/04/2010 7:34 AM  


I always look forward to your new posts, I learn more compared to school. Always looking forward. Thank you. Please come visit my site Fremont Business Services And Classifieds when you got time.

Blogger rr8004 -- 1/06/2010 5:43 AM  


I always look forward to your new posts, I learn more compared to school. Always looking forward. Thank you. Please come visit my site Fremont Phone Book when you got time.

Blogger rr8004 -- 1/06/2010 5:43 AM  


Affiliate Marketing On The Internet
Affiliate Marketing is a performance based sales technique used by companies to expand their reach into the internet at low costs. This commission based program allows affiliate marketers to place ads on their websites or other advertising efforts such as email distribution in exchange for payment of a small commission when a sale results.

www.onlineuniversalwork.com

Blogger davidbaer -- 1/06/2010 10:12 AM  


Post a Comment