Donald Sterling, owner of the NBA team the Los Angeles Clippers, has been permanently banned from the NBA and fined $2.5 million as punishment for privately made racist remarks.
Sterling’s ex-mistress Vanessa Stiviano recorded the remarks in question and released them along with 100 other hours of recordings to news outlet TMZ. While Sterling was undoubtedly in the wrong for requesting Stiviano refrain from “broadcast(ing) that you’re associating with black people” as the tapes reveal, there are severe problems with the melee of rhetoric that has been surrounding this incident since it entered the mainstream consciousness, as well as with the reaction of the NBA to it.
The permanent suspension from the NBA that has been placed on Sterling has set a drastic precedent for suspension based off of, technically, no wrongdoing. It is vital to note that Sterling did not actually commit a crime but just offended virtually the entire country and embarrassed the NBA while utilizing his constitutional right to free speech. There is severe and justifiable doubt as to whether Sterling’s team, which he rightfully owns and is thereby his private property, can be forcibly taken or harshly coerced from his possession.
The intent to flush Sterling out of the NBA was made clear in statements by the NBA
commissioner who expressed that “the (NBA team) owners have the authority subject to three-quarters vote — to remove him as owner.” The desire to make Sterling a blend of example and sacrificial lamb to quell the public outrage over his comments is tangible in the commissioner’s speech, which should raise questions about the level to which the actions of the NBA are legitimate.
The NBA and those who support its decision are beginning a dangerous slope of
advocating for inclusion while practicing exclusion. Sterling was an extreme case, but as the politically correct fervor rises, any opinion, expressed publicly or privately that is exposed and that deviates from the condoned views of the public, is now shown to have the potential to strip persons of their property and to vilify them legally and socially. Should Sterling be allowed to maintain his team, his players will likely go on strike alongside fans, and it will lose its value, which achieves the same result as forcibly taking it from him but still protects his right to speech and property (note: it would also lose the NBA millions, see their neglect to take this approach).
Stiviano recorded and released the tapes within California, which has a “two-party
consent” law, meaning that it is illegal to record someone without their express knowledge and consent when the conversation in question can reasonably be expected to be private. Should the recording be done in violation of the law, as is the case with Sterling, California Penal Code Section 632 states “no evidence obtained as a result of … recording a confidential communication in violation of this section shall be admissible in any judicial, administrative, legislative or other proceeding.”
It is noted that while illegally obtained audio recordings may be enough to destroy Sterling in the public court of opinion, when legal action is taken upon the basis of said recordings, the action is problematic and vulnerable.
Sterling has a history of offensive behavior, much of which has been far more tangibly harmful than his recent exposed comments. In 2009, Sterling paid $2.3 million to the U.S. Justice Department to settle a suit on allegations that his real estate companies in the L.A. area were discriminating against blacks, Hispanics and families with children, in their renting policies. Several years earlier, Sterling had paid a record breaking $5 million to settle a similar case.
As his court record shows, Sterling victimized minorities and those in poverty by withholding decent housing or rental agreements out of elitism and racism multiple times. But yet, stating he doesn’t want his mistress to be associating with black people is what has gotten him permanently banned from the NBA?
Sterling’s personal views on race are discouraging and abominable, but they should not garner more scorn than his more impacting actions of racism. However, these previous acts of racism done by Sterling were not in the context of a sports league containing players that each make millions of dollars, so perhaps the public did not necessitate paying as close attention to them.
Sterling will maintain his personal racist views regardless of the NBA’s punishment. As a national community, we should channel our efforts towards ensuring people like Sterling are identified and disqualified before they become raised into positions where they can transform their misguided beliefs into harmful actions. Clearly, any manifestation of racism should not be tolerated; however, let us carefully evaluate the means and prioritize the energy that we direct at combating the social disease that is racism.
Whitney Greer is a sophomore English major from Medford, Ore.
