NFL Takes Brian Flores Discrimination Fight To Supreme Court, Seeks To Block Jury Trial

The NFL asserts that 'The Arbitration Act safeguards' litigants and provides a road to resolution 'without judicial obstruction or interference.'

A federal appeals court has ruled that former NFL coach Brian Flores may take his racial discrimination lawsuit against the National Football League and several of its teams to trial. The NFL has appealed the decision.

The NFL and the Denver Broncos, Houston Texans, and New York Giants have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a ruling that allows Brian Flores’s racial discrimination lawsuit to move forward in court.

On Aug. 14, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Manhattan upheld a lower court’s decision allowing Flores’s claims to be heard in open court rather than being confined to arbitration. In contractual agreements, NFL commissioner Robert Goodell is named as the default arbiter, which creates an imbalance and unfair advantage to the defendants. The league argues the case should be forced into arbitration, challenging a lower court’s finding that Commissioner Roger Goodell’s role as arbitrator is unfair and unenforceable. The justices will decide whether to take up the appeal after Flores’s legal team responds, though the Supreme Court accepts only a small fraction of such cases.

On Jan. 9, the NFL and its co-defendants Denver Broncos, Houston Texans, and New York Giants assert that the original terms of the contract, which requires arbitration, should be upheld and are thus appealing the decision.

In “New York Football Giants, Inc., Et Al., Petitioners v. Brian Flores,” the NFL asserts that “The Arbitration Act safeguards” litigants and provides a road to resolution “without judicial obstruction or interference.” The decision to rule against arbitration is a “subjective determination” and if allowed to stand will create a judicial precedent that “unnecessarily complicates the law.”

The initial decision addresses these claims stating that provisions of the NFL constitution that would have required arbitration were not enforceable under the same Federal Arbitration Act because they did not provide for independent or neutral adjudication.

The appeals court’s opinion stated that arbitration processes giving unilateral control to an interested party do not meet the standards required for arbitration under federal law. The original decision rejects the NFL’s argument that all aspects of Flores’s claims should be resolved through internal league arbitration procedures.

Flores, who previously served as head coach of the Miami Dolphins and is currently defensive coordinator for the Minnesota Vikings, argued that discriminatory practices in NFL hiring have denied him and other Black coaches equal opportunities. Flores’s lawsuit expanded to a putative class action, with other coaches joining over time.

Flores’s claims date to a 2022 lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. He alleges that the league and multiple franchises engage in discriminatory hiring practices that disadvantage Black coaches. The lawsuit targets the NFL, the Denver Broncos, New York Giants and Houston Texans, among others, and contends that Flores and other Black coaches faced bias in interviews and employment decisions, The Hill reported. Flores’s complaint challenges what his attorneys describe as “sham” interviews conducted to satisfy the league’s diversity rules rather than genuine consideration of minority candidates.

The ruling is considered a significant development in a lawsuit that has drawn national attention to questions of race and opportunity in professional sports, as it ensures that Flores’s allegations will be adjudicated in a public forum with the transparency of trial testimony rather than private arbitration.