The league filed a federal lawsuit Monday in the Northern District of Texas seeking both a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief to allow the league the authority to use its bylaws to potentially punish Sorsby. The filing seeks: "A declaratory judgment that the First Amendment protects the Conference's right to invoke its authority under its Bylaws
to sanction [Texas Tech] related to its handling of the sports betting activity discussed in this Complaint, including if TTU fields a student-athlete in Big 12 competitions who has engaged in collegiate sports betting activity."
The Big 12's federal suit includes a request for an injunction to allow the league to enforce its own rules. At the heart of this is Big 12 Bylaw 3.6, which
allows the league via a supermajority vote to decide whether Texas Tech's conduct warrants sanctions.
The suit seeks to bar Texas Tech from "seeking to deter, coerce, prevent, or punish the Big 12 for exercising its rights under its Bylaws
to sanction TTU related to its handling of the sports betting activity discussed in this Complaint, including if TTU fields a student-athlete in Big 12 competitions who has engaged in collegiate sports betting activity."
https://www.espn.com/college-footba...es-suit-vs-texas-tech-texas-ag-brendan-sorsby
In short, the Big 12 desires
the potential to punish Texas Tech for planning to play Sorsby. Let that soak in. The Big 12 is not punishing Cincinnati for actually playing Sorsby because he gambled while playing at their institution. They want to punish
Texas Tech because Sorsby gambled while playing at
Cincinnati and Indiana. How can Texas Tech ever have confidence that the Big 12 Conference will act in its best interest, if it punishes TTU for the (in their words) "unethical behavior" that happens at other schools that are in the same conference?
I have been an avid supporter of the Big 12 Conference and its leadership. I do not think Texas Tech is too good for the Big 12 Conference. However, I now feel the Big 12 Conference is not good enough for Texas Tech or the other schools. The Big 12 Conference is supposed to support its institutions, and help them and their athletes succeed and compete in college athletics. However, it has now shown a bias towards schools in its own conference by not punishing Cincinnati for its
actual conduct, and instead pursuing intent to punish another school (Texas Tech) for the same
potential conduct.
Sorsby never gambled while playing in a game at Texas Tech. Texas Tech suspended Sorsby immediately after being alerted to the NCAA's ongoing investigation into Sorsby's gambling. Texas Tech declared Sorsby ineligible and send him to rehab for a diagnosed gambling addiction. Texas Tech declared Sorsby ineligible. Texas Tech asked the NCAA to reinstate Sorsby's egibility (and later appealed), to which the NCAA declined both. Sorsby then filed suit against the NCAA, to with an independent judge with no ties to Texas Tech granted an injuction that Sorsby would suffer "probable, imminent and irreparable injury" if he was barred from playing. Therefore, the Big 12 Conference is asking for the ability to punish Texas Tech if Sorsby plays football in accordance to this ruling. It does not show "unlawful" conduct for Sorsby to remain an active player before his court hearing in February 2027. In fact the opposite is true. The Big 12 Conference is requesting Texas Tech go against the ruling of a judge and against the law, in a rogue fashion and at the whim of the conference, to appease public opinion.