PhillySioux

Chewey, How does the nickname law survive article 1,section 18 of ND Constitution?

http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/229331/ Todays meeting will most likely be completely open.

Sioux get some jersey love from John Buccigross. @BuccigrossJohn Buccigross Man, those North Dakota black hockey sweaters are sweet.#cawlidgehawky. North Dakota-Minny Duluth gonna be good.

IMO, it doesn't pass the smell test to say that if there are remedies build into the contract then the contracts clause doesn't apply.

To me this is a slam dunk. The authority of the board in the constitution doesn't have to be mentioned. All parties are better off (save the anti higher ed cranks) if the contracts clause is the primary challenge. We will see what kind of intestinal fortitude the Attorney General has. The legislature (in my view illegally) crapped all over the deal he made as the chief legal officer of North Dakota. If he was any kind of AG, he would defend his office and the deal he signed. We will see what comes from his meeting with higher ed board today. Would one have to be a party to the contract to have standing? Or could say the UND Alumni Association as a group suffering harm, bring suit under the ND version of the contracts clause.

Im just flabbergasted that he didn't defend the contract he signed when the legislature was considering the law the first time around. He sat there twiddling his thumbs while the legislature crapped all over his deal. The more I think about this whole thing I'm starting to blame Wayne as much as Al.

UND Alumni Association speaks http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/350376/

Scott, Am I the only one that thinks a challenge under the contracts clause will be the better route? It doesn't flaunt constitutional authority of the Board and it could head off a potential amendment.

http://www.ag.nd.gov/NCAA/SettlementAgreement.pdf Yes

Step 1: UND/North Dakota signed a contract agreeing to drop he nickname. Step 2:North Dakota passed a law prohibiting UND following through on that contract. That is a problem. State Senator David Nething -R, spoke on the floor of the senate the day the Sioux Bill was passed. He explained in detail this constitutional problem with the law. He then took the rare step of having his comments published in the Senate Journal as he was quite confident that the legislature running afoul of the contracts clause.

The settlement agreement signed by the state of North Dakota with the NCAA is a contract.

The Contract Clause appears in the United States Constitution, Article I, section 10, clause 1. It states: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

Scott is correct. Much of the petition crowd doesn't believe sanctions will ever be enforced or they believe they will be a non-issue if they are enforced. Seeing is believing.

Short of expulsion for the BigSky, A more realistic possibility (and their ByLaws allow them to do it) would be for the Sky to adopt the NCAA's sanctions in conference play. Meaning, that UND would not be able to wear the logo or host conference playoffs. That would be an relatively easy vote.

Rob Port doesn't speak for anyone but himself. And he has been pretty consistent in his hatred for all things Higher Ed (I'll give him that).

Well, if he means that folks SR tribal members could vote in the general election, that is technically correct. If he means that a binding vote that the NCAA will accept per the settlement, he is dreaming.

Below are the policies of UW and UM. There have been games scheduled with UW when we were off sanction list. We are now back on. They may or may not cancel scheduled games. They surely will not schedule new ones. The state of Wisconsin passed a law banning high school native nicknames for cripes sake. http://www.lssaa.wis...s/policy07.html http://www1.umn.edu/...rimination.html The jibberish about TCF Stadium being empty is ridiculous. in 2010, Minnesota averaged 49,513 bodies. It holds 50,805. That's 97 percent of capacity with one of the worst teams in the history of the BigTen. Your are an entertaining writer, but stop making up BS.

Just like your posts!

Taco is hilarious. I don't believe it matters if there is a remedy built into the contract. Bottom line is that the law prohibits UND from complying which they surely want to do. That prohibition violates the contracts clause.

Right, a state cannot pass a law or constitutional amendment for that matter that prohibits it from adhering to the terms of a legally binding contract.

Help me understand why the Board's constitutional authority will be the primary issue. A state cannot legislate away it's contractual obligations. Am I missing something?

Are you Dosch or Skarphol?

This is inarguable.

Not in NCAA events, but otherwise it appears so

Cant plan ahead too much with open meeting laws as they are.