Hell yeah!!!
Insiders - is this until complete resolution of the case? Or until 2/23?
Final 4.What's our vector Victor?
This is the most adorable gif I have ever seen. Pure JOY!
Correct, but it does take away the DA's leverage over TSJ. Now, he can still play and defend his innocence and reputation.I'm not an insider, but this doesn't have any bearing on the case itself. That is still proceeding under the previously discussed timelines. The decision today only deals with the university's right to suspend Shannon without proper due process.
A Bob JonesWhat is the opposite of a nut punch?
I was going to ask if the university can appeal?HELL YES!
I assume the University must comply with this ruling?
Doesn't have any bearing on the case but having a judge say TSJ "has established that ... there is some likelihood of success on the merits" is hugely significant.I'm not an insider, but this doesn't have any bearing on the case itself. That is still proceeding under the previously discussed timelines. The decision today only deals with the university's right to suspend Shannon without proper due process.
The bolded above couple of sentences verifies to me hope in our democracy still exists and the stance " innocent until proven guilty " is placing the burden back on the DA out in Kansas...............Here's another key excerpt: "The Court does not agree that the harm to Plaintiff in the absence of an injunction is speculative. While it may be difficult to quantify financially, the potential loss of Plaintiff’s NBA career, NIL deal, and ability to support his family are more than speculative harms. Plaintiff alleges an injunction would eliminate the appearance of guilt and restore the presumption of innocence and status quo pending resolution of the criminal proceeding. The loss of the opportunity to play college basketball for the remainder of Plaintiff’s career is also a significant harm that is difficult to place a value on. Given that it has allowed Plaintiff to stay on campus since the alleged incident and his suspension from the basketball team, Illinois does not believe that Plaintiff is a threat to other students or the Illinois community. While the Court recognizes the strong interest the University has in acting pursuant to its policies, the Court concludes that the irreparable harm to Plaintiff by application of the DIA Policy outweighs the harm to Illinois."
Really great job by TSJ's attorneys in framing the issues in a way that led the Court to make this finding.
(of course, this is going to have huge implications going forward for every University athletics program's ability to discipline in certain ways)
A happy ending?