United States District Court Southern District of New York
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Jon Jones, Gina Carano, Frankie Edgar, Matt Hamill, Brian Stann, Zuffa, LLC d/b/a Ultimate Fighting Championship, Danielle Hobeika, Beth Hurrle, Donna Hurrle, Steve Kardian, Joseph Lozito, Erik Owings, Chris Reitz, and Jennifer Santiago, Plaintiffs, No. 11 Civ. _______ ( )( ) -against- COMPLAINT Eric T. Schneiderman, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of New York, and Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., in his official capacity as District Attorney for the County of New York, Defendants. Plaintiffs, on knowledge with respect to their own acts, and on information and belief with respect to all other matters, challenge the constitutionality of New York’s ban on the performance of professional mixed martial arts before live audiences, and allege as follows. I. INTRODUCTION 1. Mixed martial arts (“MMA”) is one of the fastest growing spectator sports in the United States. Professional MMA involves bouts between highly trained athletes skilled in various martial and combat arts, including karate, jiu-jitsu, boxing, kickboxing, grappling, judo, Muay Thai, and freestyle and Greco-Roman wrestling. MMA matches promoted by the Ultimate Fighting Championship® (“UFC”), the world’s largest professional MMA promoter, regularly fill the nation’s—and indeed, the world’s—largest arenas. The viewership of MMA on network and pay-per-view (“PPV”) television now far outstrips that of professional boxing and wrestling. Professional MMA made its debut on primetime network television in 2008, with CBS’s live broadcast of fight cards by MMA promotion EliteXC. Live UFC bouts can now be seen regularly on network television alongside professional baseball, basketball, and football, as a result of a multiyear deal reached between the UFC and FOX Broadcasting Company. UFC reaches half a billion homes worldwide and can be seen on some form of television in 155 countries and territories in 22 different languages. 2. Originally sensationalized in the early 1990s as a “no holds barred” fighting spectacle, MMA has evolved into one of the most highly regulated and controlled professional sports. This, in turn, has fueled MMA’s meteoric rise in popularity: MMA fighters grace the covers of mainstream magazines and star in popular home video workout programs, and the UFC is sponsored by the likes of the United States Marine Corps, Harley-Davidson, and Dodge. MMA appeals to fans of nearly every age and demographic, and its influence is widespread. Professional athletes in other sports incorporate MMA into their training regimens, citing the physical benefits but also the mental toughness that MMA builds. MMA techniques and training are taught to members of our nation’s military and law enforcement officers. MMA programs have sprung up to help stop bullying against students and instill confidence in them, and to steer kids away from gangs and other at-risk behavior. 3. Despite the huge popularity of MMA across this country and throughout the world, live professional MMA matches remain illegal in the State of New York. See N.Y. Unconsol. Law § 8905-a(2) (the “Live Professional MMA Ban” or the “Ban”). New York’s extraordinarily broad Live Professional MMA Ban even prohibits speech or activity that in any way “advances” or leads one to “profit[] from” professional MMA. Id. Within its broad net, the Live Professional MMA Ban potentially ensnares many existing New York businesses such as MMA gyms and vendors of MMA equipment and related merchandise. Read literally, the Ban 2 applies to numerous acts of protected speech including media broadcasts and coverage of professional MMA. 4. New York’s Live Professional MMA Ban violates numerous provisions of the United States Constitution, including the First Amendment, Equal Protection Clause, Due Process Clause, and Commerce Clause. The Live Professional 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. 5. New York’s Live Professional MMA Ban was adopted in 1997, at a time when MMA was in its infancy, had few rules, and was prohibited in many other states. Today, professional MMA operates under a unified set of rules and is permitted in virtually all of the United States, as well as in numerous countries worldwide. Medical experts concur—based on studies and data—that professional MMA is as safe as or safer than many sports that are legal in New York and, in some cases, wholly unregulated. These include football, ice hockey, downhill skiing, rodeo competitions, equestrian sports, and boxing. Most of the individual martial arts that comprise MMA are legal and performed live regularly in New York. Paradoxically, it is only their combination that is banned. 6. Former critics of MMA have changed their views in light of the realities of present-day MMA. There is great enthusiasm for MMA throughout New York—from politicians, public figures, business owners, venues like Madison Square Garden, and members of the public. Yet, despite repeated passage of a repeal by the New York Senate and the express 3 support of a majority of the State Assembly, attempts to overturn the Live Professional MMA Ban have not made it to the floor of the State Assembly for a vote. 7. Not only does the Live Professional MMA Ban put New York at odds with almost every other state in the country, it is incongruous even within the State. Countless New Yorkers watch MMA on television; it is widely available throughout the State. Tens of thousands of children and adults train at New York’s many MMA gyms and schools. The plain language of the Ban permits amateur MMA matches. Leading fighters train here. It is only professional MMA events before a live audience—and anything that advances or causes one to profit from live professional MMA—that is prohibited by the Ban. 8. When the Ban went into effect in New York, it was justified based on antipathy to MMA’s supposedly “violent” message. The legislative history and debate surrounding the Ban are replete with condemnation of the “bad” message sent by MMA. 9. Even if violence were the message of MMA, banning live professional MMA for that reason is a patent violation of the First Amendment. See Brown v. Entm’t Merchants Ass’n, __U.S.__, 131 S. Ct. 2729 (2011). But as its professional participants and millions of fans would explain, this justification for the Ban misconceives the message of MMA entirely. 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. When asked why they watch MMA, viewers commonly point to the technical skill and artistry of the fighters, the excitement of the competition, the respect between opponents, and the courage and determination to win that fighters display. 10. Professional MMA athletes exhibit great prowess; their abilities are the product of years of rigorous training and discipline. During a live performance, these professionals express 4 themselves with their bodies and with their abilities, conveying messages of, among other things, skill, courage, self-discipline, self-confidence, the value of intense training, humility, strategic thinking, and respect for one’s opponent. Their objective is to win, not to harm. MMA before a live audience is also expressive in a highly individualistic way. A woman fighter may use her performance to demonstrate to other women that they are capable of protecting themselves in any situation. A fighter who enters the arena draped in his home country’s flag pays tribute to his countrymen. Fighters pay homage to religious faith, various disciplines of martial arts, and personal heroes. None of this expression is about “violence.” 11. A live professional MMA event is both sport and theater. Fighters express themselves in every aspect of the live performance—from the entrances they stage and the walkout music they select, to the clothes they wear, to the way they conduct themselves inside the arena and towards their opponent. Fans come not just for the fights, but also for this entire unified show. 12. MMA fighters frequently show great respect for one another during matches. Even long-time rivals pitted against each other will touch gloves before a fight, and they will embrace and thank each other afterward. Fighters often speak of the brotherhood that exists among them. It is unfathomable that in a world drenched in violence—from first-person shooter video games, to violent movies, to violent lyrics in pop music, to graphic network news—the New York legislature singled out live professional MMA as the one thing it believes sends an impermissible message. II. JURISDICTION 13. This case arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States. Jurisdiction is predicated upon 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The various causes of action arise under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 5 Defendants are officials acting under color of New York law, charged with violating the constitutional rights of the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs seek a declaration that New York’s Live Professional MMA Ban violates the Constitution, an injunction against enforcement of the Ban, and attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988. 14. Venue is proper in this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391. III. MMA AND THE BAN A. Early History of MMA 15. MMA has deep roots.