Major League Baseball Players Association v. Commissioner of Major League Baseball (Rocker)

Panel Decision No. 104 (2000)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Major League Baseball Players Association v. Commissioner of Major League Baseball (Rocker)

Major League Baseball Arbitration Panel
Panel Decision No. 104 (2000)

Facts

John Rocker was a pitcher for the Atlanta Braves (Braves). During the 1999 regular season and postseason, Rocker was involved in increasingly bitter and potentially violent interactions with fans of the New York Mets (Mets). In December 1999, in an effort to generate publicity, Rocker participated in an interview with Sports Illustrated (SI), a widely circulated national magazine, in which Rocker made sexist, racist, homophobic, and xenophobic statements. SI’s publication of the Rocker interview generated a significant public outcry to which Rocker responded by apologizing. Allan H. “Bud” Selig (defendant), the commissioner of Major League Baseball (MLB) suspended Rocker (with pay) for 73 days (all 45 days of spring training for 2000 and the first 28 days of the 2000 regular season). In support of his decision, Selig claimed, among other things, that he was empowered to discipline Rocker based on the high standard of personal conduct applicable to MLB players and the MLB Basic Agreement’s provision that he could discipline a player for just cause. The Major League Baseball Players Association (association) filed a grievance on Rocker’s behalf. The association argued, among other things, that (1) Rocker’s statements were pure speech—not conduct—and thus could not be the basis for discipline both on free speech grounds and because no MLB rule or policy explicitly authorized speech-based discipline; (2) Rocker made the statements while off-duty; and (3) Rocker’s suspension was unreasonably long in light of other disciplinary actions (or nonactions) for other players in drug-related and non-drug-related cases, including the fact that no other player had been disciplined for speech under the just-cause standard.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Das, Chmn.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 814,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership