Tell us what’s going on here.

This is really an 11th hour legal challenge to try to stop the fight — the event — from happening in about a week. What they’re arguing in this lawsuit — a Virginia political organizer and a Virginia military veteran — is that the staging of this event is unlawful on federal grounds without proper authorization from Congress. And they argue, in so many words, that the plan is deeply corrupt because the president is giving a private company — the UFC — unfettered access to the White House and the Lincoln Memorial to stage a private for-profit sports event, and they argue that Paramount Skydance, David Ellison’s company with close allegiances to the president, is going to charge people $9 a pop to watch this thing on pay per view. All of it’s happening on federal lands and federal grounds, but it’s benefiting private enterprises with close ties to the White House.

This suit, as you said, calls it a for-profit spectacle on public land. How unusual is this sort of thing? Have we seen something where, in this case, we have access being charged to people who want to watch it? Have we seen this sort of thing at the White House before?

Hard to speak for prior generations. I can’t recall something quite like this in my time here — been here 25 years. But, the lawsuit argues that this thing is unprecedented in its current incarnation, the way it’s been devised, and they argue that federal law tightly restricts private use of these sacred monumental spaces. T hey’re national park lands. You have to go through a permitting regime, typically, to get these things, and you can’t get access to the South Lawn. But a private company has managed to do so. What’s more, they’re making the argument here, Mike, and this is important, that the president’s now flirting with the idea of keeping that massive UFC cage up after the event’s over. S o, it could be a semi-permanent part of the landscape on the South Lawn, and that would be objectionable. And it’s worth noting, for those who know the UFC, this is a 30-five page lawsuit. A couple pages are dedicated to explaining what the UFC is and quoting some of the misogyny and vulgarity recently uttered by some of the participants before matches.

What are the next steps here in court? H ow quickly could we see something?

Yeah, I’d expect the plaintiffs to try to find some way of getting a court order before the event. T hat would make the lawsuit moot if the event happened, and then they heard the arguments after. It’s a long shot, but, I think this also raises public awareness of some of the arguments here, that this is enriching private companies, and this is public space being used to do so with the p resident’s blessing. And they also note, Mike, it’s happening on the p resident’s birthday. T hey think that’s not a coincidence; t his may be a self-aggrandizing way for the White House to celebrate the birthday.

Last-minute lawsuit looks to halt UFC White House event

change volume

download audio

Chief Washington Correspondent for Meidas Touch Network Scott MacFarlane breaks down the last-minute lawsuit filed against the UFC White House match set for June 14.

A lawsuit looking to block the Ultimate Fighting Championship match being held on the White House grounds was filed over the weekend, arguing that the June 14 event is a “deeply corrupt” corporate handout.

that neither an executive department nor an official entity tied to the U.S.’s semiquincentennial is involved in the “planning, organizing, and executing” of what’s being billed as UFC Freedom 250.

The filing points out that neither the event nor its construction on federal grounds received congressional approval, adding that government space will be used to benefit the UFC and its chief executive, Dana White, who “is a close friend and ally” of President Donald Trump.

鈥淭he president is giving White and his company what none have enjoyed before: unfettered access to the White House and Lincoln Memorial to stage a private, for-profit sports event, with all the promotional and branding opportunities that accompany such access,鈥� the lawsuit states.

Freedom 250, a public-private partnership overseen by the Trump White House, is a distinct entity from America 250, the nonprofit created by an act of Congress in 2016.

In a statement to 海角精品黑料, the Department of the Interior said the UFC match “is no different than the various other White House-hosted events on the South Lawn and properly permitted events on the Ellipse and National Mall throughout the year.”

鈥淭his is an obstructionist, baseless, and dilatory lawsuit brought simply to prevent President Trump from hosting what will undoubtedly go down as one of the most historic sporting events in our Nation鈥檚 history during our semiquincentennial celebration,” the agency said.

Scott MacFarlane, the chief Washington correspondent for the Meidas Touch Network, joined 海角精品黑料’s Mike Murillo to break down the lawsuit.

The transcript below has been lightly edited for clarity.

Mike Murillo:
Tell us what’s going on here.
Scott MacFarlane:
This is really an 11th hour legal challenge to try to stop the fight 鈥�听the event 鈥� from happening in about a week.

What they’re arguing in this lawsuit 鈥�听a Virginia political organizer and a Virginia military veteran 鈥�听is that the staging of this event is unlawful on federal grounds without proper authorization from Congress.

And they argue, in so many words, that听the plan is deeply corrupt because the president is giving a private company 鈥�听the UFC 鈥�听unfettered access to the White House and the Lincoln Memorial to stage a private for-profit sports event, and they argue that Paramount Skydance, David Ellison’s company听with close allegiances to the president, is going to charge people $9 a pop to watch this thing on pay per view.

All of it’s happening on federal lands and federal grounds, but it’s benefiting private enterprises with close ties to the White House.

Mike Murillo:
This suit, as you said, calls it a for-profit spectacle on public land.

How unusual is this sort of thing? Have we seen something where, in this case, we have听access being charged to people who want to watch it? Have we seen this sort of thing at the White House before?
Scott MacFarlane:
Hard to speak for prior generations. I can’t recall something quite like this in my time here 鈥�听been here 25 years.

But, the lawsuit argues that this thing is unprecedented in its current incarnation, the way it’s been devised, and they argue that federal law tightly restricts private use of these sacred monumental spaces.

They’re national park lands. You have to go through a permitting regime, typically, to get these things, and you can’t get access to the South Lawn.

But a private company has managed to do so.

What’s more, they’re making the argument here, Mike, and this is important, that the president’s now flirting with the idea of keeping that massive UFC cage up after the event’s over. So, it could be a semi-permanent part of the landscape on the South Lawn, and that would be objectionable.

And it’s worth noting, for those who know the UFC, this is a 30-five page lawsuit. A couple pages are dedicated to explaining what the UFC is and quoting some of the misogyny and vulgarity recently uttered by some of the participants before matches.

Mike Murillo:
What are the next steps here in court? How quickly could we see something?
Scott MacFarlane:
Yeah, I’d expect the plaintiffs to try to find some way of getting a court order before the event. That would make the lawsuit moot if the event happened, and then they heard the arguments after.

It’s a long shot, but, I think this also raises public awareness of some of the arguments here, that this is enriching private companies, and this is public space being used to do so听with the president’s blessing.

And they also note, Mike, it’s happening on the president’s birthday. They think that’s not a coincidence; this may be a self-aggrandizing way for the White House to celebrate the birthday.