Mixed Martial Arts (“MMA”) proponents have been battling in the New York political octogon for years to get the 1997 ban imposed on “live MMA events” lifted. New York is one of only a few states in the country with athletic commissions that do not sanction them. So after numerous failed attempts to pass legislation lifting the ban, the biggest promoter in the sport of MMA, Zuffa LLC (“Zuffa”) - a private company and parent company of the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) - along with a group of plaintiffs comprised mostly of fighters residing in and around NewYork, filed a lawsuit against the state of New York to get the ban lifted. The gounds for the complaint? A first of it's kind claim for a sport - the ban is “unconstitutional”.
The two reasons that the state has given for banning MMA events is that it's not safe, and the other is that it sends a bad, violent message. First of all, no combat sport is one hundred percent safe but since this ban was enacted, new stricter unified rules in the sport have improved safety. That aside, the lawsuit doesn’t hinge on whether or not the sport is safe or violent, it hinges on whether a live MMA event is protected under the First Amendment as form of “entertainment”. The lawsuit states: “Live professional MMA is clearly intended and understood as public entertainment and, as such, is expressive activity protected by the First Amendment.While there surely are spectators who watch solely because of their misconceived hopes of seeing ‘violence,’ countless fans watch MMA because of the variety of positive messages conveyed.”
The law suit hinges on recognizing the "arts" in Mixed Martial Arts and classifying the need for athletes to participate in the sport across the state as something that should be protected under the First Amendment. Zuffa asserts that MMA is both a sport and theater for entertainment purposes, comparing fighters to actors, figure skaters, ballerinas and bands. The lawsuit added, “Live professional MMA is clearly intended and understood as public entertainment and, as such, is expressive activity protected by the First Amendment. The real intent of the ban, the organization alleged, is to “squelch its expressive element.”
Moreover, the suit contends that the MMA Ban limits the liberty of those who would, but for the Ban, attend live professional MMA events, as well as those who train in MMA and want to exhibit their skills as professionals before a live crowd. Indeed, for the many New Yorkers who devote endless hours to training in MMA and who cannot afford to displace their homes and families to fight elsewhere, New York's Live Professional MMA Ban presents a serious infringement of their rights."
This is the first lawsuit of its kind by a sports organization claiming freedom of expression under the Constitution and an athlete asserting their First Amendment right to entertain. The suit defines MMA by its artistry, rather than its violence, comparing the sport to a dance. This writer isn’t a constitutional attorney, but the comparison of MMA to more accepted artistic practices like singing and dancing or performing in a nightclub, sounds like a bit of a stretch.
At the end of the day, this lawsuit is a request for the Federal government to step in and by-pass State government’s refusal to sanction MMA events. While constitutional rights cannot be trampled on and overruled by states decisions, states generally have autonomy to decide what is best for them in a Democracy. The challenge of whether this is a violation of an athlete’s first amendment rights is unique. It seems to be short on legal precedent other than a case cited in the lawsuit where a court ruled that expressions of violence in video games are protected by the First Amendment. The argument that a cage match is an “expression of art” may be a tough sell nevertheless.
You have to assume that Zuffa knows that winning this suit is a monumental task and it just may be legal posturing to get the state to reconsider instead of going through an expensive legal battle. Legal posturing aside, and noting that this writer is much more of a boxing fan then MMA fan, there is really no logical reason why live MMA events shouldn’t be held in New York. New York is home to a wide variety of world-class sporting events. The sport of MMA has evolved and has grown in popularity so much so that it’s selling out large arenas in Las Vegas and all over the world. Moreover, the sport’s stellar safety record speaks for itself with no fatalities to date.
As I said, this writer is an old-school boxing fan but does not see what the problem is with lifting the ban on live MMA events, and most importantly, let’s bring some of that cash to New York.
Comments