- Brian Flores’ lawsuit against the NFL and several of its teams can proceed in open court
- Flores’ attorneys hailed Thursday’s ruling as ‘a victory not only for NFL employees, but for workers across the country’
- The decision affirmed a 2023 ruling issued by a lower court
Minnesota defensive coordinator Brian Flores’ lawsuit against the NFL and several of its teams can proceed in open court after a federal appeals court ruled Aug. 14 that the league’s arbitration provision is unenforceable.
The decision, published in a written brief by a three-judge panel at the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, affirmed a 2023 ruling issued by a lower court and paves the way for Flores to move ahead with his lawsuit. Flores initially sued the league and several of its teams in 2022, alleging racial discrimination in hiring practices.
Flores’ attorneys hailed Thursday’s ruling as ‘a victory not only for NFL employees, but for workers across the country − and for anyone who believes in transparency, accountability and justice.’
‘The significance of the Second Circuit’s decision cannot be overstated,’ attorneys Douglas Wigdor, David Gottlieb and John Elefterakis said in a statement. ‘For too long, the NFL has relied on a fundamentally biased and unfair arbitration process − even in cases involving serious claims of discrimination. This ruling sends a clear message: that practice must end.’
NFL spokesperson Brian McCarthy wrote in an e-mail that the league intends to appeal the decision.
‘We respectfully disagree with the panel’s ruling (in the Flores case) and will be seeking further review,’ McCarthy wrote.
Thursday’s decision marked a second significant legal defeat for the NFL in four days. The Nevada Supreme Court also ruled against the league − and criticized the arbitration provision in its constitution − on Aug. 11, in a separate lawsuit filed by former Las Vegas Raiders head coach Jon Gruden. The league is also asking for a rehearing in that case, McCarthy said.
If the NFL’s rehearing requests are unsuccessful, the league could then appeal each to the U.S. Supreme Court, which could choose whether or not to hear either case.
While the facts and allegations of the two lawsuits are substantially different, the NFL has taken the same early legal step in each − trying to force the disputes behind closed doors, into private arbitration.
Flores’ lawsuit, which was originally filed in February 2022, alleged ‘systemic racial discrimination in the hiring, retention and termination of NFL coaches and executives.’ More specifically, he said the Denver Broncos and New York Giants brought him in for ‘sham’ head-coaching interviews, and alleged the Miami Dolphins and Houston Texans retaliated against him.
The NFL dismissed the claims as ‘without merit’ and has since argued the issues fall under the arbitration clause in the league’s constitution, which allows commissioner Roger Goodell to rule on various disputes or appoint an independent arbitrator to oversee them. Coaches agree to abide by the NFL constitution when signing their employment contracts with teams.
U.S. District Judge Valerie Caproni ruled in 2023 the league’s arbitration clause does apply to Flores’ claims against the Dolphins, because he was employed by the team at the time. But she found it does not apply to his claims against the other teams and the NFL. And the appeals court agreed, arguing that the arbitration process is not fair because it allows Goodell to exercise control over who hears disputes against the league, or against himself personally.
In Thursday’s ruling, the appeals court wrote that the league’s arbitration provision is ‘unworthy even of the name of arbitration.’
The decision means, barring a successful appeal from the NFL, Flores can litigate his claims in court − a public forum which theoretically force some of the league’s private information into the open. It also leaves open the possibility that the case could go to trial.
Contact Tom Schad at tschad@usatoday.com or on social media @tomschad.bsky.social.
