NFL appeals Ezekiel Elliott injunction

Getty Images

The six-game suspension the NFL handed down to Cowboys running back Ezekiel Elliott was put on hold when Judge Amos L. Mazzant III granted a preliminary injunction last Friday and the legal fight has moved on to its next step.

The league filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in hopes of getting that injunction overturned.

If the appeal is granted and the NFL succeeds in the next stage of the legal battle, Elliott’s suspension could go into effect. How quickly that will be decided is unclear, but chances are that it won’t happen immediately as the average time for a case to go from notice of appeal to decision is over eight months. There is the option for either side to ask for an expedited appeal, although doing that didn’t make things move much faster in the case of Tom Brady‘s appeal of his four-game suspension.

The NFL ultimately came out on top in this case and is surely hoping for the same result this time around, although it may be a while before we find out.

22 responses to “NFL appeals Ezekiel Elliott injunction

  1. NFL’s unfair investigation practice has been exposed again, but this time its not just about cheating. It’s about accusing someone of a vile act.. hopefully the courts see the difference this time and dont let the NFL skate, even though it looks extremely more likely than not that Zeke is entirely innocent.

  2. Remember when Cowboys’ fans told Pats fans that Brady should just “man-up” and serve his suspension? I seem to even remember Jerry Jones holding that sentiment.

    The shoe doesn’t feel so good on the other foot….eh?

  3. This is now becoming sad. The NFL really screwed this up and absolutely refuse to admit it. Anyone want to bet what the highest rated game of the week will be? Yep, Cowboys-Giants. And the NFL is trying to do everything possible to ruin that as well.

  4. Yeah, the appeals courts probably have more important cases to decide upon than this case. So, look for Elliott to play for the foreseeable future. What would actually be more fascinating is if the appeals court upheld the injunction and ruled against the NFL, that would be news.

  5. Judge Mazzant III was very clear, strong in his decision. Pointing to the flawed nfl discipline process and it’s bias decision makers, specifically Goodell, Friel and appeals arbitrator Henderson. The nfl has already started backtracking and trying to cover it’s overt bias in the Josh Brown case, in rather comedic fashion.

  6. nhpats says:
    September 11, 2017 at 10:20 am
    Remember when Cowboys’ fans told Pats fans that Brady should just “man-up” and serve his suspension? I seem to even remember Jerry Jones holding that sentiment.
    The shoe doesn’t feel so good on the other foot….eh?
    —–
    No Cowboys fans care about the Patriots. No Cowboys fans care about Tom Brady. This case has NOTHING to do with that case. Why are NE fans so obsessed with the Cowboys, you may ask…. Because the Cowboys are AMERICA’S TEAM! How bout them COWBOYS!!!!

  7. “Feed me” after every first down? Is he getting royalties? This might be a time in your life when you DON’T want to call attention to your ego, Zeke…or at least come up with some fresh material.

  8. The players apparently can get away with anything and you fools will defend them no matter what, especially if they play for your team.
    If you were suspected of, or committed DV, and your media was destroyed in the press for it, would they fire you? Yes of course they would, without hesitation.
    Why? Because you damaged the company, you brought negative publicity to the company, which could affect profits and future success.
    So am I to assume, based on the ridiculous amount of support for EE< that you ALL actually believe that you can harm your employer's company and brand (in public) and expect to keep your job and not be disciplined for your actions at all?
    Because THAT is what you are saying when you defend EE.

  9. pfatalbert I agree 75% but the NFLPA and the media will fight that tooth and nail and claim that “every case is different”.
    The other 25% that I would add to the rule is that any player SUSPECTED of DV, illegal drugs, insert criminal act here…would be punishable for an immediate suspension of 8 games and forfeiture of salary for those games.
    The goal here is to force the PLAYER to not put himself into compromising situations that will result in suspension or banishment.
    The system right now is to let the player do whatever they want and then issue discipline based on the circumstances. this has failed.

  10. redclaw1314 says:
    September 11, 2017 at 10:32 am

    guilt or innocence is secondary—it’s all about the cba now
    ———————

    These cases are never about the CBA. They are about whether or not the NFL followed the law, and so far, they haven’t.

  11. pfatalbert says:
    September 11, 2017 at 10:43 am

    They just need a general rule that says Arrested = x games if misdemeanor, y games for felony, and z games for if found guilty.
    ———————

    They had a specific rule that said first time domestic abusers get a 6-game suspension, but unfortunately the first case was with a Giants player, and Giants superfan Lisa Friel only gave him a 1-game suspension.

  12. dryzzt23 —

    You can’t punish someone for being “suspected” of anything … there needs to be proof and/or conviction of said crimes.

    Also, things you should consider when you question the “ridiculous amount of support for “EE”. It’s not just support for Elliott, it’s support for transparency and fairness in prosecution. The accuser’s text messages and witness accounts clearly state her plan to railroad Elliott. Based on this and many other inconsistencies in the accuser’s stories, the DA refused to press charges and the NFL’s chief investigator found the accuser to be untruthful and recommended no suspension. On top of all that, the NFL concealed/omitted the investigator’s recommendation and barred her from reporting her findings directly to the commish.

  13. dryzzt23 says:
    September 11, 2017 at 11:09 am
    The players apparently can get away with anything and you fools will defend them no matter what, especially if they play for your team.
    If you were suspected of, or committed DV, and your media was destroyed in the press for it, would they fire you? Yes of course they would, without hesitation.
    Why? Because you damaged the company, you brought negative publicity to the company, which could affect profits and future success.
    So am I to assume, based on the ridiculous amount of support for EE< that you ALL actually believe that you can harm your employer's company and brand (in public) and expect to keep your job and not be disciplined for your actions at all?
    Because THAT is what you are saying when you defend EE.
    —————————————————————————————-

    Difference is if my company fires me for that and I was falsely accused I can sue for damages.

    The NFL operates differently because of the CBA. Goodell basically can do whatever he wants because of what was collectively bargained.

    Does anyone have clear evidence that Elliott did do it? i don't anyone is saying he is a choir boy, but i also don't know enough and have seen enough credibility issues from the accuser to question if he did. This is why he wasn't charged.

  14. dryzzt23 says:
    September 11, 2017 at 11:09 am
    The players apparently can get away with anything and you fools will defend them no matter what, especially if they play for your team.
    If you were suspected of, or committed DV, and your media was destroyed in the press for it, would they fire you? Yes of course they would, without hesitation.
    Why? Because you damaged the company, you brought negative publicity to the company, which could affect profits and future success.
    So am I to assume, based on the ridiculous amount of support for EE< that you ALL actually believe that you can harm your employer's company and brand (in public) and expect to keep your job and not be disciplined for your actions at all?
    Because THAT is what you are saying when you defend EE.
    ========================
    Sigh. This argument is getting tired. If a company fired you for being suspected of a crime they are inviting a wrongful termination suit. Full stop. So no, they would absolutely be hesitating. At least until due process has been served and innocence or guilt has been proven in a fair and unbiased manner via the law of the land. They sure as heck won't be setting up a kangaroo court to make that determination themselves in some ridiculous facsimile of "fairness" outside of the common judicial system.

    It's comical how people can conflate a clearly biased and predetermined process with condoning a despicable act. They aren't the same. Despite what the NFL would like you to believe. NOBODY is claiming acceptance of harming a brand. The heart of the issue is how that harm is being determined. Nothing more and nothing less.

  15. “They just need a general rule that says Arrested = x games for misdemeanor, y games for felonies, and z games for if found guilty”

    No, what they need to do is get out of the criminal justice business.

  16. “The goal is to force the PLAYER to not put himself into compromising situations that will result in suspension or banishment”.

    Who gets to decide what constitutes a “compromising situation”? Why do you possibly care about what situation the player puts himself in?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!