watchmaker49 Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Seems the SL CUR missed their filing deadline for their petitions. http://www.grandfork...icle/id/251546/ Somebody must have cut their funding when they found that it was a lost cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 I guess I didn't know an appeal was pending, is there anything new being introduced that could possibly cause the Court to reconsider or is this just playing out the process? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 I guess I didn't know an appeal was pending, is there anything new being introduced that could possibly cause the Court to reconsider or is this just playing out the process? Doubtful. Appellate courts have a lower threshold than the Supreme Court. IMHO the NC$$ might like this venue since a favorable ruling might also ice the case Pennsylvania is pursuing, e.g., antitrust. Even a result favorable to SL would probably not alter the course the state and UND have pursued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted January 12, 2013 Author Share Posted January 12, 2013 Doubtful. Appellate courts have a lower threshold than the Supreme Court. IMHO the NC$$ might like this venue since a favorable ruling might also ice the case Pennsylvania is pursuing, e.g., antitrust. Even a result favorable to SL would probably not alter the course the state and UND have pursued. I am not a lawyer nor did I stay in a Holiday INN express, but I see no way that SL can win in this? Am I missing a point here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Even if the SL were to win...the state of ND voted to retire the name. Game over!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 If SL wins and gets the matter remanded, there may or may not be the big "NCAA will sanction us" fear that was used earlier. The well promoted fear factor is the reason why people voted the way they did. If SL wins and there's no longer a basis to sanction, that's a game changer. Of course, it's a big IF that SL will win. Of course, the fact that the matter even got a date for oral argument is a positive because the 8th Circuit does not have to provide one and can just decide the matter on the briefs that have been filed. The NCAA and its legal team are arrogance personified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 If SL wins and gets the matter remanded, there may or may not be the big "NCAA will sanction us" fear that was used earlier. The well promoted fear factor is the reason why people voted the way they did. If SL wins and there's no longer a basis to sanction, that's a game changer. Of course, it's a big IF that SL will win. Of course, the fact that the matter even got a date for oral argument is a positive because the 8th Circuit does not have to provide one and can just decide the matter on the briefs that have been filed. The NCAA and its legal team are arrogance personified. It won't matter. To the NCAA UND needs the Standing Rock's blessing...good luck with that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted January 12, 2013 Share Posted January 12, 2013 It won't matter. To the NCAA UND needs the Standing Rock's blessing...good luck with that one. It does matter. That's what I mean by remanded for "further factual findings." Namely, the facts to be determined at the district court level would be whether it was already granted in 1969 as many on SR, except RHHIT and JTA and their cohorts, contend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darell1976 Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 It does matter. That's what I mean by remanded for "further factual findings." Namely, the facts to be determined at the district court level would be whether it was already granted in 1969 as many on SR, except RHHIT and JTA and their cohorts, contend. I don't think UND will go back to the Fighting Sioux name. Remember if either tribe were to change their mind UND would have to retire the name again, and no one wants to go through this again. This contraversey got the best of everyone, it is a tiresome issue and most are accepting change has happened and in two years we will have a new name. I love the Sioux name and logo, there will never be a better name or logo than that one but I have accepted that the NCAA has won and UND lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 If SL wins and gets the matter remanded, there may or may not be the big "NCAA will sanction us" fear that was used earlier. The well promoted fear factor is the reason why people voted the way they did. If SL wins and there's no longer a basis to sanction, that's a game changer. Of course, it's a big IF that SL will win. Of course, the fact that the matter even got a date for oral argument is a positive because the 8th Circuit does not have to provide one and can just decide the matter on the briefs that have been filed. The NCAA and its legal team are arrogance personified. Considering their track record over the years, and the nearly laughable "attorneys" representing SL, the NC$$ lawyers have every right to personify arrogance. And if there is a remand there will be a trial, a verdict and the requisite appeals. By the time that plays out over 4-5 years, the "the Fighting Sioux" will be a hazy recollection and UND will probably have a new moniker and nickname. UND's fight is over. Whatever happens between SL and the NC$$ is nothing but a pathetic circus. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 I dont think the Sioux name will ever go away in Hockey no matter what a bunch of lawyers say or do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchmaker49 Posted January 13, 2013 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Considering their track record over the years, and the nearly laughable "attorneys" representing SL, the NC$$ lawyers have every right to personify arrogance. And if there is a remand there will be a trial, a verdict and the requisite appeals. By the time that plays out over 4-5 years, the "the Fighting Sioux" will be a hazy recollection and UND will probably have a new moniker and nickname. UND's fight is over. Whatever happens between SL and the NC$$ is nothing but a pathetic circus. Who is going to pay the costs for those years? All this is going to due is give the NCAA one more case of precedent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chewey Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 Considering their track record over the years, and the nearly laughable "attorneys" representing SL, the NC$$ lawyers have every right to personify arrogance. And if there is a remand there will be a trial, a verdict and the requisite appeals. By the time that plays out over 4-5 years, the "the Fighting Sioux" will be a hazy recollection and UND will probably have a new moniker and nickname. UND's fight is over. Whatever happens between SL and the NC$$ is nothing but a pathetic circus. Irrespective of the chances for success, it's not a "pathetic circus" to those Native Americans who have been wronged by the consummate duplicity and racism of the NCAA and expedient disassociation by UND. To the Native Americans who see through and who do not tolerate either affected "concern" regarding Native American traditions and customs or self-serving, insincere protestations about needing to "preserve the rich history of the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo", it's not a joke. It's not a joke to Bennett Brien. To Byron Dorgan (a true exemplar of fidelity and guilelessness who had the pomposity to lecture the Indians and was told to pound sand), Jody Hodgson and Tim O'Keefe, who profess that the nickname and logo represent more than just the school's teams but who really just want to save a building and who want the same Native American's they've insulted to get on board with the arrangement they already have with the NCAA so that everything looks good, it's probably a joke. The whole charade has, amazingly, resulted in unity among both the pro-nickname and anti-nickname Native Americans though. None of them wants continued usage of the imagery. The antis never did and the pros now don't because they see all of the affected and transparent claims of "respect" for what they were and are. The "pathetic circus" is how UND has managed to add the 95% of NA's with whom it was previously allied to the implacable 5% with whom it was at odds. None of that matters because the NCAA has been placated and there's "attaboy" slaps on the back and affirmations a plenty that this or that person's a "consummate professional" when in reality those same parties really have just reinforced and perpetuated racism and further disrespected the traditions, culture and customs they claimed to honor. The "pathetic circus" is the writhing and agitated progression of justifications and rationalizations not only by the NCAA to inflict its monopolistic authority upon one of its members under the guise of eradicating "racism" but also by UND to save $$$$ under the guise of "respect for tradition, history and native customs." Quite a cynical valediction by UND and the Alumni Association with respect to something that's been "loved" and "cherished" for 82 years. Everything will be better though with the wall of history/tradition idea, or whatever, that was proposed for the REA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post choyt3 Posted January 15, 2013 Popular Post Share Posted January 15, 2013 I dont think the Sioux name will ever go away in Hockey no matter what a bunch of lawyers say or do for eff sake... It wasn't just hockey's nickname. It was all of the University. Hockey isnt its own island. For x amount of time, you'll hear people at all UND events yell "Sioux". Eventually that will be replaced by chants of the new nickname. Even at REA. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fetch Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 Not a chance at Hockey ...well maybe cheerleaders will be forced to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Did this hearing take place Thursday? Anybody hear anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Did this hearing take place Thursday? Anybody hear anything? Story from the Grand Forks Herald, http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/256538/. Not much new information. Soderstrom allowed his intern to make the case. They tried to stress the 1969 ceremony and even tried to sell the court that it constituted a contract because UND created a bunch of Native American programs. No decision has been announced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jodcon Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Story from the Grand Forks Herald, http://www.grandfork...icle/id/256538/. Not much new information. Soderstrom allowed his intern to make the case. They tried to stress the 1969 ceremony and even tried to sell the court that it constituted a contract because UND created a bunch of Native American programs. No decision has been announced. Looks like mostly rehash, surprised Soderstrom let the student argue the case, but from what was said on here he didn't do very well the first time around himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Looks like mostly rehash, surprised Soderstrom let the student argue the case, but from what was said on here he didn't do very well the first time around himself. The fact the wannabe lawyer used the term "blasphemous" in an oral argument demonstrates an inherent weakness in their approach. But at least the kid gets some good experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchmaker49 Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 The fact the wannabe lawyer used the term "blasphemous" in an oral argument demonstrates an inherent weakness in their approach. But at least the kid gets some good experience. Unlike Pearson Hardman I don't think Soderstrom's firm hires their associates fro Harvard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82SiouxGuy Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Unlike Pearson Hardman I don't think Soderstrom's firm hires their associates fro Harvard. The kid is a Penn State student and interned last summer. Not Harvard, but not Bill's School of Law either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moser53 Posted March 25, 2018 Share Posted March 25, 2018 On 8/7/2012 at 9:00 AM, GeauxSioux said: http://www.grandforksherald.com/event/article/id/242357/group/homepage/ A federal judge says it appears the political fight over the University of North Dakota's Fighting Sioux nickname is over and has thrown out a lawsuit by six American Indian students at UND. The suit was filed last year after the state Legislature passed a law requiring the school to keep the nickname. The law was later repealed, but retirement of the logo was put on hold when a group of nickname supporters put the issue to a statewide vote. March 9 18 Ralph Erickson the judge who ruled against the 6 American Students over the Sioux Nickname was promoted to 8th Circuit Federal Judge. Watching the TV clip that day made me think where have I heard that name before. Google search brings you to that decision. Coincidence Ralph Erickson and Ralph Engelstad are both born in Theif River Falls. Reading Erickson’s ruling on this lawsuit the 6 Students never stood a chance. Quote While some last gasps of further political action are still echoing across the state. It appears that as a political issue the (Fighting Sioux). Ickname and logo dispute has been resolved and the losing position cosigned to the trash heap of history. The Nickname was as bad as Communism.Trash heap of history. Never had a chance . Hal Gershman and Dave St Peter wanted no nickname as an option. Kelly said no Kelly was wrong. New vote needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts