Josh Jacobs facing charges…

[Magooch]

Again this narrative is only half true. Her side requested the judge seal it.

Judge denies request to seal video of altercation in Josh Jacobs case

A status conference is scheduled in the case at 11 a.m.

fox11online.com

See above, they both did. Jacobs did immediately after sentencing, temporary seal was granted with the expectation Jacobs and/or the victim would pursue further motion(s). That request was denied and the judge ruled the footage is subject to public record law so there’s not really any avenue for Jacobs to request another broad-stroke generic sealing of the footage. (And generally the victim is seen as having a stronger legal standing to request for a seal, if that request was denied then any further from Jacobs would basically be dead in the water)

Now of course the judge’s ruling upon declining the seal request and turning over jurisdiction to local PD did stipulate that Jacobs or the victim could file to try and block any release request(s) (such as the request for footage made by the league) but I’d have to think that Jacobs filing a formal motion to attempt to stop the video from being released to the league…. Is not something that the league would take very kindly to lol

 

[tynimiller]

See above, they both did. Jacobs did immediately after sentencing, temporary seal was granted with the expectation Jacobs and/or the victim would pursue further motion(s). That request was denied and the judge ruled the footage is subject to public record law so there’s not really any avenue for Jacobs to request another broad-stroke generic sealing of the footage. (And generally the victim is seen as having a stronger legal standing to request for a seal, if that request was denied then any further from Jacobs would basically be dead in the water)

Now of course the judge’s ruling upon declining the seal request and turning over jurisdiction to local PD did stipulate that Jacobs or the victim could file to try and block any release request(s) (such as the request for footage made by the league) but I’d have to think that Jacobs filing a formal motion to attempt to stop the video from being released to the league…. Is not something that the league would take very kindly to lol

For sure! I'm a fan of full truth which is both have tried keeping the video from public.

 

[Magooch]

Latest update -

Following the Court’s direction on September 24, 2026, the Hobart-Lawrence Police Department completed its review and balancing test of the responsive records, determining that certain records could be released with appropriate redactions.

On October 5, 2026, the Department issued the required notices to the record subjects of its decision under Wis. Stat. § 19.356 concerning records obtained through subpoenas and search warrants. Since issuing those notices, the Department has received written notifications from attorneys representing the record subjects of their intentions to seek judicial orders restraining disclosure, including objections concerning the broader investigative records.

These records are therefore subject to the statutory release waiting period and any judicial proceedings under § 19.356. This process is separate from the general timeframe for responding to public records requests. The Department also provided courtesy notification of its intent to release additional records, including police reports, body-worn camera recordings, and squad camera recordings.

Accordingly, the Department is temporarily withholding all responsive records in accordance with the statutory waiting period and any applicable court orders. This temporary hold does not constitute a denial of your request or a reversal of the Department’s balancing-test determination. Records not independently subject to § 19.356 remain under review for release as soon as legally appropriate.

The Department recognizes its obligation under Wis. Stat. § 19.35(4)(a) to respond to public records requests as soon as practicable and without delay. Wisconsin law does not establish a fixed 10-day response deadline, and the Department continues to process this request in accordance with its statutory obligations.

We will provide further updates as the legal proceedings develop and the Department determines when the responsive records may be released.

Thank you for your patience and understanding.

The short of it seems to more or less suggest that someone (presumably the NFL) requested access to video footage...and the way it reads is that both Jacobs and the victim ("attorneys representing the record subjects") have notified of their intention to attempt to block the release...

The league still has basically no update, but if Jacobs and/or victim are actively trying to block the release of the footage, I wouldn't expect a speedy resolution here

 

[tynimiller]

Latest update -



The short of it seems to more or less suggest that someone (presumably the NFL) requested access to video footage...and the way it reads is that both Jacobs and the victim ("attorneys representing the record subjects") have notified of their intention to attempt to block the release...

The league still has basically no update, but if Jacobs and/or victim are actively trying to block the release of the footage, I wouldn't expect a speedy resolution here

Yup, BOTH don't want it released.

My personal gut says this means this is sadly a very typical domestic situation where both sides were screaming perhaps even physical towards eachother but Jacobs ultimately crossed a line of ascerting physical dominance in a way that she then contacted police.

Why I pause with that is Jacobs side could somehow release a statement essentially saying something to that effect. "On (insert date) my client and his then girlfriend had a disagreement which included both verbal and physical aspects both ways. Ultimately however my client feels he ultimately mishandled the situation and accepts responsibliity for his choices regardless of her actions."

However, to the best of my knowledge Jacobs and his representation have been insanely silent...which my gut also is uneasy about....

 

[Magooch]

It's just a really unusual situation all around.

As has been discussed many times, I think we all are probably familiar by now that the league/CBA standard for domestic cases (and they DO consider this a domestic case regardless of WI law) is that you start with a 6 game suspension as a baseline and either work up or down based on the circumstances.

Now of course it's safe to say at this point that Jacobs will not be playing this week against Dallas, which means he will have missed.... six games.

So I guess my feeling is...surely Jacobs knows what is on the footage in question by now. And so I would think that - knowing what is on the footage and knowing that the league works with a 6-game baseline - unless you recognized there was something on the tape that would cause the league to increase your suspension beyond 6 games (which is probably moot at this point, as it seems like that will happen either way), you might as well just provide the tape and take your 6 games and be done with it.

Now I understand Jacobs is still getting paid. So perhaps from his perspective, there's not a lot of urgency here. But I just can't figure why you'd be fighting so hard to keep the footage sealed unless you felt like it was going to cause you more trouble than you already have.

One other thing I would keep in mind too, if you recall with Deflategate...the league investigation DID conclude Brady had some knowledge of the football-deflating scheme BUT a big factor in the punishment imposed was because they felt Brady was noncooperative, he impeded their investigation, refused to provide evidence, wasn't forthcoming, had one of his phones destroyed, etc...

So it would seem to me this is another risk that Jacobs is running now? Regardless of what is on the footage if the league feels he/his counsel is continually being obstructive they may increase his punishment on that basis, too....

 

[tynimiller]

It's just a really unusual situation all around.

As has been discussed many times, I think we all are probably familiar by now that the league/CBA standard for domestic cases (and they DO consider this a domestic case regardless of WI law) is that you start with a 6 game suspension as a baseline and either work up or down based on the circumstances.

Now of course it's safe to say at this point that Jacobs will not be playing this week against Dallas, which means he will have missed.... six games.

So I guess my feeling is...surely Jacobs knows what is on the footage in question by now. And so I would think that - knowing what is on the footage and knowing that the league works with a 6-game baseline - unless you recognized there was something on the tape that would cause the league to increase your suspension beyond 6 games (which is probably moot at this point, as it seems like that will happen either way), you might as well just provide the tape and take your 6 games and be done with it.

Now I understand Jacobs is still getting paid. So perhaps from his perspective, there's not a lot of urgency here. But I just can't figure why you'd be fighting so hard to keep the footage sealed unless you felt like it was going to cause you more trouble than you already have.

One other thing I would keep in mind too, if you recall with Deflategate...the league investigation DID conclude Brady had some knowledge of the football-deflating scheme BUT a big factor in the punishment imposed was because they felt Brady was noncooperative, he impeded their investigation, refused to provide evidence, wasn't forthcoming, had one of his phones destroyed, etc...

So it would seem to me this is another risk that Jacobs is running now? Regardless of what is on the footage if the league feels he/his counsel is continually being obstructive they may increase his punishment on that basis, too....

So paid "yes" but once the suspension is levied Packers do get cap relief for all the time suspended...which honestly is a sizable chunk in possibly backfilling some spots if needed or working on any extensions we might need to do proactively.

6 game suspension would provide roughly $3.3M-$3.6M relief against the cap because his per game base salary should be in the $575,000 per game roughly...roster bonus per game is roughly $41,765 a game it seems.

 

[Voyageur]

As I mentioned before, we don't know when the recording started and ended. I think the only part of what happened that was caught on video was the last part of it when they were in view of the cameras. A lot could happen prior to that point that would not be seen and that could be what caused the end result.

I'm going to relate a situation that happened to a cop I worked with. He was on patrol when an APB came out for a car, including description and color. He was on the expressway when a car that somewhat matched the description except the color was wrong. But, in his mind, everything else fit. He hit the lights and pulled him over to the side of the road and radioed in to let them know he made the stop and wanted more descriptive information about the person in question.

Before he could put the handheld speaker down, the guy had sprung out of his car and was standing at the driver's side window of his unit, holding a 9mm handgun. Since the window of his unit was open the guy looked at him and told him to hand over his gun, or he was going to shoot him. Larry knew how dangerous the man was because of the response he'd just been given over the radio.

"Okay! No problem." Larry said, reaching slowly towards his holster. At the last second, Larry pushed back on the seat and began drawing his gun. The suspect pulled the trigger and hit Larry on the left side of his chest. The bullet went in, followed the rib cage and came out on his right side just below his rib cage. By then Larry had pulled his .357 out and started shooting through the car door. He fired 3 shots and the man fell. Larry pushed the door open and saw that the man was alive and reaching to retrieve his gun. Larry got out of the car and at point blank range fired a round into the man's head killing him instantly. Larry shot him technically while he was unarmed but did it because his concern was that he was going to die and this man would get away and harm others. In fact, he had just shot and killed two clerks in a 7-11 store less than 10 miles from where this stop was made. It wasn't the first, because the man had hit two other convenience stores prior to this and put both clerks in the cooler where he shot and killed them. He was leaving no witness trail.

A woman driving by arrived at the time that Larry was standing over the suspect and saw Larry shoot him in the head. She saw nothing else and as soon as she got home, she called the police and said she saw a police officer murder a man on the highway for no apparent reason. She also called a newspaper office and said the same thing. Of course, even then, it went viral in respect that one newspaper printed the unsubstantiated story that from what she saw was factual. But, it didn't cover the totality of what happened. Larry knew that if he got to his gun the man would kill him and he knew he himself was going to black out.

I was the second officer to arrive on the scene after it happened. It was easy to piece together what had transpired.

But let's look at the same thing in today's day of videos and media. The video related to Jacobs is exactly the same as what happened with Larry. The woman saw the end result just like the woman saw the end result, but nothing that transpired before that was recorded. Fortunately for Larry, his word was good about what happened because he'd been shot. IF he hadn't been, the woman's words would have carried a lot of weight. Josh does not have a video to back up what happened prior to the video.

I'd do everything I could to stop the release as well. If you can't get the whole story and get it straight, don't use a "film clip" of an event and call it the scope of what happened.

 

[OldSchool101]

I agree I don’t think you’ll ever get an accurate depiction of a probably 20 minute event with a 22 second video clip. I think it’s probably more misleading to the buildup and aftermath than anything.

Assuming a Woman is automatically innocent in an altercation or criminal offense is about as prejudicial as you can get. Kinda interesting how Men just assume the Woman is innocent in a criminal altercation. Many cases I’ve studied it was the Woman who was the Mastermind of some of the most evil crimes imaginable. Manipulation is an art that isn’t gender specific, but women can be very crafty at pulling strings so to speak.

Jacobs is learning what I’ve learned long ago. Just be the first to call 911 and have her removed from his property. It would’ve ended better for both. I do know first hand that good people get tied up in bad situations. One bad move doesn’t necessarily equal a bad person for life. Sometimes it takes an incident like this to learn a better version of response. We forget how young these guys (or girls) are, many are 20-something. That’s not a ton of life experience. People are going to make mistakes we can’t throw the book at someone for an isolated incident.

 

[tynimiller]

As I mentioned before, we don't know when the recording started and ended. I think the only part of what happened that was caught on video was the last part of it when they were in view of the cameras. A lot could happen prior to that point that would not be seen and that could be what caused the end result.

I'm going to relate a situation that happened to a cop I worked with. He was on patrol when an APB came out for a car, including description and color. He was on the expressway when a car that somewhat matched the description except the color was wrong. But, in his mind, everything else fit. He hit the lights and pulled him over to the side of the road and radioed in to let them know he made the stop and wanted more descriptive information about the person in question.

Before he could put the handheld speaker down, the guy had sprung out of his car and was standing at the driver's side window of his unit, holding a 9mm handgun. Since the window of his unit was open the guy looked at him and told him to hand over his gun, or he was going to shoot him. Larry knew how dangerous the man was because of the response he'd just been given over the radio.

"Okay! No problem." Larry said, reaching slowly towards his holster. At the last second, Larry pushed back on the seat and began drawing his gun. The suspect pulled the trigger and hit Larry on the left side of his chest. The bullet went in, followed the rib cage and came out on his right side just below his rib cage. By then Larry had pulled his .357 out and started shooting through the car door. He fired 3 shots and the man fell. Larry pushed the door open and saw that the man was alive and reaching to retrieve his gun. Larry got out of the car and at point blank range fired a round into the man's head killing him instantly. Larry shot him technically while he was unarmed but did it because his concern was that he was going to die and this man would get away and harm others. In fact, he had just shot and killed two clerks in a 7-11 store less than 10 miles from where this stop was made. It wasn't the first, because the man had hit two other convenience stores prior to this and put both clerks in the cooler where he shot and killed them. He was leaving no witness trail.

A woman driving by arrived at the time that Larry was standing over the suspect and saw Larry shoot him in the head. She saw nothing else and as soon as she got home, she called the police and said she saw a police officer murder a man on the highway for no apparent reason. She also called a newspaper office and said the same thing. Of course, even then, it went viral in respect that one newspaper printed the unsubstantiated story that from what she saw was factual. But, it didn't cover the totality of what happened. Larry knew that if he got to his gun the man would kill him and he knew he himself was going to black out.

I was the second officer to arrive on the scene after it happened. It was easy to piece together what had transpired.

But let's look at the same thing in today's day of videos and media. The video related to Jacobs is exactly the same as what happened with Larry. The woman saw the end result just like the woman saw the end result, but nothing that transpired before that was recorded. Fortunately for Larry, his word was good about what happened because he'd been shot. IF he hadn't been, the woman's words would have carried a lot of weight. Josh does not have a video to back up what happened prior to the video.

I'd do everything I could to stop the release as well. If you can't get the whole story and get it straight, don't use a "film clip" of an event and call it the scope of what happened.

I think the video at a minimum depicts the act which she focused on in her filing...so I assume is the "worst" for him. It could absolutely align with the thouht of not Ray Rice signficant or it could...which that "risk" alone that he isn't willing to want it released makes my gut churn. I know it isn't the whole story for sure, but...

 

[Magooch]

See the thing that I can't quite figure out is like...Jacobs' criminal liability is already covered. There's nothing in the video that could lead to more criminal charges at this point.

And the DA has already said as much - as you recall Jacobs was initially given more charges AND more serious charges to start. Too lazy to go back and look it up but IIRC it was 5 charges and at least one felony. The DA also specifically stated that viewing the garage footage was a big piece of their charging decisions - they didn't feel they had evidence to support the initial charges but DID feel that the video supported the misdemeanor charges that he got.

And on top of that you have Jacobs himself testifying under oath that the police's report/accounting of the incident was complete and accurate as described.

So it's like....
You have the police making a report and collecting evidence, which Jacobs has testified was accurate
And the DA takes that report and evidence (of which the video was a key supporting piece) and says "This reporting and evidence supports two misdemeanor charges; we don't have evidence to pursue additional/stronger charges"
And again Jacobs himself says "A jury would find me guilty of the two charges as you have filed them"

And so we are effectively saying that there is something contained in this video footage that WOULD trigger more stern punishment from the league or WOULD do more harm to Jacobs' reputation....BUT at the same time WOULD NOT support additional charges beyond the misdemeanors that he was hit with.

So I guess I'm just having a really hard time imagining what that could be? What could be contained in this footage that would cause the league to punish Jacobs beyond the six-game standard (or however many he sits out for at this point)....but also not be enough to justify any additional charges? What could this tape show that would cause the DA to view it and say "this only supports two misdemeanors" while at the same time Jacobs thinks whatever is shown would be so wildly damaging to his career/reputation? It just seems like a really strange spot to be stuck in the middle with.

I mean, I guess alternatively the explanation is that Jacobs and/or the victim just really are that committed and steadfast in their desire to protect their own/each others' privacy

 

[OldSchool101]

Id also reiterate. Just because someone doesn’t want video of an altercation leaked to the entire world doesn’t infer guilt. Most people can’t stand having someone film them and it has nothing to do with being guilty. Now imagine someone showing you at a not so good sliver of time and using it to promote what a “bad” person you are.
I wouldn’t want film of me eating dinner going public. Doesn’t infer I’m a Felony Violent Repeat Offender

 

[AKCheese]

There’s still the whole matter if I read the police report correctly that he left his own house to try to diffuse the situation she stole one of his cars and followed him, blocking him in and that’s when he returned to his condo. I mean, there’s clearly culpability on both their parts. I just don’t understand why the NFL is dragging their feet like this.

 

[OldSchool101]

There’s still the whole matter if I read the police report correctly that he left his own house to try to diffuse the situation she stole one of his cars and followed him, blocking him in and that’s when he returned to his condo. I mean, there’s clearly culpability on both their parts. I just don’t understand why the NFL is dragging their feet like this.

Yes. Intentional or not, in their attempt to play it safe or protect their own interests (NFL) they only make themselves look worse. The guy has already technically been suspended 5+ and counting. Regardless of pay the missed games are damaging to his career. You can never get it back and the black cloud of suspicion alone could cost him Hundreds of Thousands or possibly millions in future contract or endorsement losses. Not to mention even if they decided today he’s probably a game or two from getting ramped back up. As his Counsel I’d argue the suspension concerning lost games $$ is the least of his damages. We’re way past 6 games in monetary losses. I would’ve rather signed up for 8 games lost in Week 1 over having the NFL hang a cloud of suspicion over his life.
If that sounds exaggerated? We’ve already witnessed fans in here trying to call for his career.

 

[Magooch]

Jacobs and his attorneys have officially sued Hobart PD to block the release of any and all records related to this incident.
The cliff notes of it was basically that:
1. Victim already petitioned as well to have records sealed and Jacobs supports this request, advocating for her right to privacy
2. The footage would reveal details of Jacobs' home, garage, belongings, etc. Since Jacobs obviously travels a lot (typically), people could use this information to know when he's away from home and use that info to potentially commit crimes or such.

Honestly all of that tracks with me but the biggest discrepancy to me is that it seems like Jacobs and Co are pressing for a total and permanent seal on any and all records in ALL circumstances.... no valid form of release whatsoever. And their filing documents keeps referencing how it's not right for the public to see the footage. This exposes Jacobs to risk and is a privacy concern for the victim. Again, that tracks BUT it's not so black-and-white.

Jacobs and Co are presenting it as though it's a binary between A.) total and permanent seal of everything and B.) widespread release to the general public of all unredacted records

But of course there is a lot of in-between there that this doesn't account for. For instance Hobart PD's initial stance seemed to support a mostly public release with redactions where appropriate.
And it could also very well be the case that records are sealed BUT may be released for a specific purpose on a limited basis - i.e. you could have the records/footage released specifically to the league as part of their investigation while not releasing anything to the general public.

BUT I think that would likely require a court order for such an arrangement. So to give both parties the benefit of the doubt, maybe that is the angle here:
1. Hobart PD initially supports public release with redactions
2. Jacobs and victim sue for complete seal
3. Court order blocks widespread/public release but does allow for specific limited release (i.e. to the NFL)

Anyways Hobart PD has 20 days to respond (and they took EVERY day allotted when the league made their initial request) so you can go ahead and cross off Cowboys, Lions, Panthers, and Patriots (as though they weren't already lol). Assuming a ramp-up period IF he is reinstated anytime around then, absolute best-case scenario would probably be Week 12 against the Rams

 

[milani]

Jacobs and his attorneys have officially sued Hobart PD to block the release of any and all records related to this incident.
The cliff notes of it was basically that:
1. Victim already petitioned as well to have records sealed and Jacobs supports this request, advocating for her right to privacy
2. The footage would reveal details of Jacobs' home, garage, belongings, etc. Since Jacobs obviously travels a lot (typically), people could use this information to know when he's away from home and use that info to potentially commit crimes or such.

Honestly all of that tracks with me but the biggest discrepancy to me is that it seems like Jacobs and Co are pressing for a total and permanent seal on any and all records in ALL circumstances.... no valid form of release whatsoever. And their filing documents keeps referencing how it's not right for the public to see the footage. This exposes Jacobs to risk and is a privacy concern for the victim. Again, that tracks BUT it's not so black-and-white.

Jacobs and Co are presenting it as though it's a binary between A.) total and permanent seal of everything and B.) widespread release to the general public of all unredacted records

But of course there is a lot of in-between there that this doesn't account for. For instance Hobart PD's initial stance seemed to support a mostly public release with redactions where appropriate.
And it could also very well be the case that records are sealed BUT may be released for a specific purpose on a limited basis - i.e. you could have the records/footage released specifically to the league as part of their investigation while not releasing anything to the general public.

BUT I think that would likely require a court order for such an arrangement. So to give both parties the benefit of the doubt, maybe that is the angle here:
1. Hobart PD initially supports public release with redactions
2. Jacobs and victim sue for complete seal
3. Court order blocks widespread/public release but does allow for specific limited release (i.e. to the NFL)

Anyways Hobart PD has 20 days to respond (and they took EVERY day allotted when the league made their initial request) so you can go ahead and cross off Cowboys, Lions, Panthers, and Patriots (as though they weren't already lol). Assuming a ramp-up period IF he is reinstated anytime around then, absolute best-case scenario would probably be Week 12 against the Rams

The team just has to approach the season as if he is not there. The Packers can only deal with what is in front of them. Ramp up for a RB is not the same as other positions. Not practicing with the team hurts as well. With the hits on our roster this season just getting him on the field means he just maybe the next man up.

 

[El Guapo]

Well, I look at this wait until Week 12 as a positive. We might have an angry and motivated Josh Jacobs back with fresh legs for a potential playoff run.

 

[Poppa San]

Well, I look at this wait until Week 12 as a positive. We might have an angry and motivated Josh Jacobs back with fresh legs for a potential playoff run.

He can be our "James Starks v2.0"

 

[Rick A]

Jacobs is covering his *** because he does not want video released. Will probably reflect a situation that could show violence that can at a minimum get him suspended for the year, or worse case could end up a career killer ala Ray Rice. He makes it sound like he is protecting the woman, but that is bs, he is only concerned on playing again.

 

[Rick A]

Jacobs is covering his *** because he does not want video released. Will probably reflect a situation that could show violence that can at a minimum get him suspended for the year, or worse case could end up a career killer ala Ray Rice. He makes it sound like he is protecting the woman, but that is bs, he is only concerned on playing again. Should have thought it over before getting involved with Caleb Williams ex "girlfriend".

 

[OldSchool101]

Now he’s a Career Killer because he wants to protect his privacy?
This is just getting to ridiculous levels.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Jacobs is covering his *** because he does not want video released. Will probably reflect a situation that could show violence that can at a minimum get him suspended for the year, or worse case could end up a career killer ala Ray Rice. He makes it sound like he is protecting the woman, but that is bs, he is only concerned on playing again.

He obviously has something to hide and I'm done with it. Time to cut him and move on.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Id also reiterate. Just because someone doesn’t want video of an altercation leaked to the entire world doesn’t infer guilt. Most people can’t stand having someone film them and it has nothing to do with being guilty. Now imagine someone showing you at a not so good sliver of time and using it to promote what a “bad” person you are.
I wouldn’t want film of me eating dinner going public. Doesn’t infer I’m a Felony Violent Repeat Offender

Get your head out of the sand, man. If the video shows he did nothing wrong, why WOULDN'T he want it released?

 

[tynimiller]

Get your head out of the sand, man. If the video shows he did nothing wrong, why WOULDN'T he want it released?

Who said nothing wrong? If the video defends what she claimed why does she want it blocked?

I don’t see how anyone logically can make a declaration of any certainty of what it would show…I’m sorry but that’s just utter foolishness to declare one way or another.

 

[BrokenArrow]

Who said nothing wrong? If the video defends what she claimed why does she want it blocked?

I don’t see how anyone logically can make a declaration of any certainty of what it would show…I’m sorry but that’s just utter foolishness to declare one way or another.

Again, if the video shows that JJ did nothing wrong, why would HE not want it to be seen? If what it shows is favorable on him, why would he not want it released so he can get back on the field ASAP? If what it shows is damning, then I don't want him on my team.

 

[OldSchool101]

Get your head out of the sand, man. If the video shows he did nothing wrong, why WOULDN'T he want it released?

Look who’s talking. It’s the Law and it’s been the part of the Law since well before the creation of our Constitution. Those Laws are tied in from Federal all the way down to local government and for exceptional good reason.

Are you suggesting we should break the Law in order to appease your curiosity? Your wild suspicions or baseless accusations don’t supercede my legal rights. Which is the directional this is headed if people like you with zero foresight start pushing for government seizure of private property in order to make it public domain. I havnt thought about it before but It’s very possible this becomes a Large scaled Federal Lawsuit.
I don’t think the NFL has even thought this through very good imo. I could see this backfiring in a paramount way. The NFL in particular would be wise to distance themselves from this Civil Suit before it grows and they can’t separate themselves. They stand to lose Billions if this goes South