Former LSU football coach Les Miles, who coached the Tigers to a national championship in 2007 but was tainted by scandal, sued LSU, the NCAA and the National Football Foundation (NFF) and Hall of Fame Monday over his ineligibility for the College Football Hall of Fame.

In a complaint filed in a Louisiana federal district court, Miles, 70, contends he is a victim of a conspiracy to violate his due process rights as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. He seeks a court declaration that he’s eligible for the Hall of Fame, that vacated wins of games he coached count for eligibility and that “any agreement” between the defendants to exclude vacated wins be deemed void and unenforceable.

Miles finished his head coaching career with a record of 145-73* (66.5% winning percentage), including a 114-34* record from 11 seasons at LSU, where he has the highest winning percentage (77%*) in school history.

Notice the repeating asterisk. In 2023, LSU vacated 37 wins that occurred from 2012 through 2015. As a result, LSU’s official record during that time is 0-14, and Miles’ career record is officially 108-73, a winning percentage of 59.7%. 

The revised calculations reflect an NCAA investigation into recruiting infractions regarding the LSU football and basketball teams. The NCAA found three violations connected to the football team, two of which, Miles stresses, occurred after he left the school in 2016. The one under Miles’ watch involved a booster who offered to employ the parents of LSU guard Vadal Alexander at the Our Lady of the Lake Foundation (a nonprofit for a hospital) and eventually hired the father. The booster later pleaded guilty to federal charges for defrauding the foundation. The NCAA found LSU had failed to monitor the booster. 

As part of a settlement with the NCAA, LSU agreed to self-impose penalties rather than take the chance of experiencing a more severe punishment. Those penalties included scholarship reductions, recruiting restrictions and—of consequence to Miles—vacating 37 football wins. Vacating wins means the wins no longer count and are treated by the school and NCAA as if they never happened. 

The NFF, which Miles insists is “controlled” by the NCAA, sets criteria for college football coaches’ eligibility for nomination and admission into the Hall of Fame. Coaches must be at least 70 years old (or 75 if still active), have been a head coach for at least 10 years, coached at least 100 games and earned a winning percentage of at least 60%. Miles’ official percentage is 59.7%, and thus Miles is ineligible. 

Through attorney Peter Ginsberg, Miles argues that had LSU not offered to vacate the wins in a settlement, had the NCAA not accepted the offer and had NFF not gone along with the outcome, Miles would be eligible. 

In the coming weeks, the defendants will answer the complaint and motion for its dismissal. 

Expect at least four main defense arguments.

First, the defendants will likely assert that Miles lacks standing to bring this case. Universities and their member associations, such as an NCAA member school and the NCAA, can reach understandings to resolve disputes. Likewise, individual school employees—even powerful and highly paid ones like a head football coach—can’t block those agreements. The defendants will insist they didn’t need Miles’ blessing and that even if his eligibility for professional achievements was damaged as a result of vacating wins, that is not a legal injury for which they can be held responsible.

Second, expect LSU (a public university) to argue that while Miles may have been owed a hearing and other due process protections before the school fired him in 2016, those protections were connected to his property interest in employment—not his eligibility for a hall of fame. Attorney Tom Mars, who has represented college coaches and college athletes in contractual disputes, said he is “not aware of any precedent for a coach having a property interest in their W/L record.” Wins and losses are attached to a team and school, not a coach or player.

Third, LSU could insist any injury is inherently speculative. Miles was also a head coach at Oklahoma State and Kansas, the latter of which he coached after leaving LSU and finished with a 3-18 record. Miles could have qualified if his teams had performed better. 

Lastly, expect the defendants to suggest Miles’ case advancing could open Pandora’s Box and the floodgates to litigation. If a coach or former coach has a property interest in wins, so too could players who played in those wins. Staff and perhaps even boosters and ticket holders might also say they have a protected stake. 

Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer said his conservative Austrian People’s Party would remain in the current government coalition with its Green party junior partner — even though the Green’s environment minister voted on Monday for the so-called Nature Restoration plan, which Nehammer has opposed.

Environment Minister Leonore Gewessler’s vote in a European Union ballot earlier on Monday came after months of domestic political debate and infuriated the senior partner in the coalition government ahead of a national election set for Sept. 29.

Before Nehammer’s statement, speculation had been growing in Austria about whether he would break up the coalition government.

EU LEADERS CONVENE IN BRUSSELS, WILL DISCUSS PLACEMENTS FOR TOP JOBS IN BLOC

“The emotion would be there” for an end to the coalition, but Nehammer told journalists it was his “responsibility, as federal chancellor, to ensure an orderly path” until the parliamentary elections, Austrian public broadcaster ORF reported.

“I won’t do it,” he added.

After her vote, Gewesseler wrote on X that “my conscience tells me unmistakably (that) when the healthy and happy life of future generations is at stake, courageous decisions are needed.”

Earlier, the chancellery said Nehammer informed the Belgian EU presidency that a vote in favor of the plan by Gewessler would be unlawful, the Austria Press Agency reported. Nehammer’s office later said Austria plans to file a suit at the European Court of Justice to nullify the vote.

His party also announced that it would press criminal charges against Gewessler for alleged abuse of office.

The Nature Restoration plan is part of the EU’s European Green Deal that seeks to establish the world’s most ambitious climate and biodiversity targets and make the bloc the global point of reference on all climate issues.

In the buildup to the EU elections that saw a shift to the right earlier this month, European farmers complained about the many environmental laws governing the way they work, arguing that the rules were harming their livelihoods and strangling them with red tape.

Nehammer himself is under pressure in Austria after a narrow win by the far-right Freedom Party over the chancellor’s conservative Austrian People’s Party in the European Parliament election last week that saw hard-right parties achieving major gains across the 27-nation bloc.

Following his party’s defeat in the European election, Nehammer acknowledged there is “great dissatisfaction,” APA reported. He also vowed his party would convince voters of how seriously it took their concerns over the coming months confronting issues of migration and overregulation.

Bangkok, Thailand – Thailand’s nearly one-month-long Senate selection process kicked off last week, amid accusations that the system is skewed in favour of the conservative establishment, and as legal threats against the opposition risk derailing tentative steps back towards democracy.

After seizing power in a 2014 coup, the Thai military directly appointed 250 people to the upper house in a move seen as an attempt to stymie meaningful political reform as the country transitioned back to a flawed democracy. After last year’s election, the senators blocked the progressive Move Forward Party (MFP) from forming a government, even though it had won the most seats in parliament and the largest share of the vote.

The Senate’s role in choosing the prime minister was temporary, however, as was its direct appointment by the military. This month a new batch of 200 senators is being selected from the leaders of key industries, in a complicated weeks-long process where only registered candidates are allowed to vote.

Candidates must be over 40 years old, have 10 years of experience in their field, not be a current member of a political party, and pay a registration fee of 2,500 baht ($68). Ten candidates will be selected from 20 occupational groups, including government, law, education, arts and culture, and women’s affairs. The final round of voting is expected on June 26, with results announced on July 2.

“The new lot of senators will have two key roles,” said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a professor and senior fellow at the Institute of Security and International Studies at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok.

“Constitutional change requires one-third of the 200 new senators. Equally important, the new senators will have oversight over appointments of the Election Commission and Constitutional Court.”

The current constitution was promulgated under the military in 2017, and calls for it to be amended or scrapped have grown in recent years. Rulings by the Election Commission and Constitutional Court, meanwhile, have seen pro-democracy political candidates and parties dissolved and banned.

Most recently, they have turned their attention to MFP. The Election Commission recommended that the Constitutional Court dissolve the progressive party based on its calls to reform the controversial lese-majeste law, which criminalises criticism of the monarchy. The Constitutional Court is still deliberating and could announce its decision on Tuesday. It previously ruled in January that MFP’s reform attempts were tantamount to attempting to overthrow the monarchy.

Thitinan said that given the continued importance of the Senate, it was “being contested fiercely”.

“There will likely be moves by the conservative establishment, including the Election Commission, to make sure the Senate does not end up with enough progressive voices to change the constitution,” he said.

Even the constitutionality of the senate selection has been challenged, with the Constitutional Court expected to deliver a verdict on its legality on Tuesday morning.

Ruchapong Chamjirachaikul, a member of the legal advocacy group iLaw, said the process was “neither fair nor democratic” and that was intentional.

“The problems you see in the process are a feature not a bug… a lot of them are by design,” he said, adding that the process should not be called an “election” but a “selection”.

Chamjirachaikul said his team has already received some reports of irregularities, like former generals registering to represent the agriculture sector, or people being offered 10,000 baht ($270) to register and vote for a specific candidate.

‘Tainted’

June, a 26-year-old assistant to progressive candidate Nongyao Nawarat, a retired professor of sociology at Chiang Mai University, said the “unfair selection system” was designed to prevent young people from participating.

She said the approach showed the establishment was scared of younger voters and their demands for reform, and would do whatever it took to block real change. Before the election, progressive activists and candidates activated their grassroots networks, encouraging as many people sympathetic to the movement as possible to register as candidates.

“Of course, conservatives do similar things,” June said. “And they still [have] the advantage of spending more money. But I still believe in the power of the people on our side.”

Because of the way the process is structured, it is impossible to counter conservative organising without encouraging contacts to register with the intention of voting for somebody else. But Chamjirachaikul said the progressive strategy was to be “open and transparent”.

“We have a public event and ask any candidate to come to this event, the press are allowed to be there, and they will introduce themselves in the open,” he said. “You have to say what you stand for – new constitution, amending lese-majeste, democratic principles, are you against another coup?”

Chamjirachaikul stressed candidates needed to sign up, even if they did not expect or even want to win a seat, in order to vote.

“We don’t pay anyone, we don’t even have the money to pay anyone. But if you’re over 40, have the money, have the time and want to contribute to democracy, you can register and vote for somebody who shares the same vision of democracy for Thailand as you,” he said.

He said the eventual senate will lack representation and accountability, which will further tarnish the body’s reputation, already “tainted” by years of acting as a proxy for the military.

“When you don’t have clear representation you don’t have clear accountability, unlike MPs who would have to be confronted by their own constituencies, but who are these new senators’ constituencies? There’s no one,” Chamjirachaikul said.

However, even with the selection issues, Thitinan said the next senate would “still be more representative of the Thai people compared to the expired 250-member senate which was chosen by the military”.

This is in line with other modest reforms since last year’s election, which saw the moderate pro-democracy Pheu Thai Party form a coalition government with conservative and military-backed parties.

But Chamjirachaikul said it was worth asking why Thailand needed a Senate at all. “We as Thais should be able to debate and discuss on this openly,” he said. “We’ve seen enough of the Senate.”

June said regardless of what the establishment did to hold back the tide, youth activists would continue fighting for change.

“We are the new generation. We will do whatever it takes to change this country for the better. It may not happen in a single session or in a single night. But it will gradually change.”