Started By
Message
I need some LSU fans to go on record.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:30 am
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:30 am
Check in if you believe Lane’s 1st amendment rights were violated?
So far I’ve had 3 in one thread who believe this.
So far I’ve had 3 in one thread who believe this.
33
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:31 am to pankReb
They were violated just as much as the SEC’s were.
Only one of them has filed a lawsuit alleging it though.
Only one of them has filed a lawsuit alleging it though.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:31 am to pankReb
As of right now, no. He hasn’t faced any repercussions for his tongue in check comment.
Ask me again if the SEC suspends him for it.
Ask me again if the SEC suspends him for it.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:31 am to pankReb
Violated how? What are you talking about? A little context would help
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:32 am to pankReb
I believe the SEC, specifically Sankey, looks like a butthurt bitch who got upset because LK trolled him.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:32 am to supersaints9
quote:
Violated how? What are you talking about? A little context would help
I’m trying to figure out myself. Several lsu fans believe this.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:33 am to Covingtontiger77
quote:
Ask me again if the SEC suspends him for it.
Still not a 1st amendment violation.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:33 am to Covingtontiger77
quote:
As of right now, no. He hasn’t faced any repercussions for his tongue in check comment.
Ask me again if the SEC suspends him for it.
Sigh..... For a 1st amendment violation, there must be some action by a state or federal government. The SEC is neither.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:34 am to pankReb
The only violated rights in this whole saga are those of the two players the SEC forced LSU to not include on the roster after the court told them they could. Other than that, I don’t see anyone else’s rights violated.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:34 am to RB10
quote:
They were violated just as much as the SEC’s were.
Only one of them has filed a lawsuit alleging it though.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:34 am to TDsngumbo
quote:
The only violated rights in this whole saga are those of the two players the SEC forced LSU to not include on the roster after the court told them they could. Other than that, I don’t see anyone else’s rights violated.
And what right is that?
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:35 am to pankReb
quote:
And what right is that?
The one that they were granted by a judge just like all of the other players that are playing on TROs in the SEC.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:36 am to TigerLunatik
Name the right. I’m having difficulty seeing any of this in the Bill of Rights.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:37 am to pankReb
quote:
And what right is that?
The same “right” Diego Pavia and Trinidad Chambliss sued and won over.
The right to continued NCAA eligibility to maximize earrings potential.
I literally explained this to you last night when I told you these guys were going to sue the SEC, which is exactly what’s happening. Eventually, you should tire of being wrong.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:37 am to pankReb
quote:
Check in if you believe Lane’s 1st amendment rights were violated?
What?
I don't know what rule he broke but SEC has not done anything yet but sue him
Which I don't completely understand - it seems like they want to expel us without blowback but why is Lane named in suit?
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:38 am to pankReb
Only one party filed 1st amendment grievances based on some old ruling that only Vanderbilt applies to
So no. Who is saying this?
So no. Who is saying this?
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:39 am to memphisplaya
quote:
Who is saying this?
Several lsu fans.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:41 am to RB10
quote:
I literally explained this to you last night when I told you these guys were going to sue the SEC
You continue to attempt to make an idiotic point by using Pavia’s case that the SEC will be financially responsible for the other two players. It didn’t work last night and it won’t work today. LSU removed any and all ability for the SEC to be held financially responsible
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:46 am to UpToPar
quote:..les sigh deux...
Sigh..... For a 1st amendment violation, there must be some action by a state or federal government. The SEC is neither.
You'd think that was true, but tell that to Twitter, er, X, Facebook/Meta and just about every media outlet not tied to MAGA who got sued for violating "first amendment rights" when they made editorial decisions about what content was allowed on their (non-government) platforms.
While you're technically correct, in this climate it doesn't matter, and you probably couldn't find 1 person in 100 that actually understands what the 1st Amendment actually says.
Posted on 9/9/26 at 8:48 am to Dotarian
quote:
You'd think that was true, but tell that to Twitter, er, X, Facebook/Meta and just about every media outlet not tied to MAGA who got sued for violating "first amendment rights" when they made editorial decisions about what content was allowed on their (non-government) platforms. While you're technically correct, in this climate it doesn't matter, and you probably couldn't find 1 person in 100 that actually understands what the 1st Amendment actually says.
quote:
Yes, Twitter (now X) has been sued by users claiming it violated their First Amendment rights, but these lawsuits are routinely dismissed because Twitter is a private company, not a government entity. [1] (LINK [2] (LINK Lawsuits Against TwitterTrump v. Twitter: President Donald Trump sued Twitter and its CEO after being banned, alleging his free speech rights were violated. A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that private companies are not bound by the First Amendment. [1] (LINK v. Weber: A political commentator sued Twitter and a California state official, arguing that his account suspension over election content violated the First Amendment. Courts have generally reaffirmed that private moderation decisions do not constitute government censorship. [1] (LINK
You can sue for whatever you like….does mean that the claim is valid.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News