Calls For Federal Investigation Into WNBA’s Treatment Of Caitlin Clark Are Patently Absurd

A federal probe into hard fouls, are we serious?

Caitlin Clark has gotten roughed up in her first two seasons in the WNBA. She has taken cheap shots, she’s been fouled hard, and it would be disingenuous to say that she doesn’t have a target on her back.

That target comes with being the face of a league, and for Clark, her target is even larger, as she’s not just the face of the WNBA, but the face of women’s basketball as a whole.

Sophie Cunningham Blasts People Who Say Caitlin Clark Isn’t Face Of WNBA: ‘Dumb As F**k’

Jealousy, pettiness, and even hatred have all played roles in Clark being on the receiving end of a hard foul or an extra shove here and there after the whistle, but again, that’s par for the course regarding any superstar in any competitive sport. 

At the same time, it can also be true that the WNBA and its officials have done a laughable job at protecting the player who is single-handedly selling out arenas, setting viewership records, and is the reason the sports media world is paying attention to the league for the first time in its history.

Saying that the WNBA has to do better at protecting Clark and other stars around the league is more than fair, but going from that statement to calling for a federal investigation into the league’s handling of Clark seems like a bit much.

Nevertheless, that’s exactly what former White House staffer Sean McLean opined about in a recent column in the Wall Street Journal in which he called for a federal probe into “potential civil rights violations.”

“The league has fostered a hostile workplace for Ms. Clark through excessive fouling, targeting, and hostile comments from other players and owners,” McLean wrote.

“Ms. Clark’s targeting may reflect a culture of disparate treatment, and the evidence provides reasonable cause for a federal probe into potential civil-rights violations,” he continued in the piece. “This would mirror the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission investigation into Dearica Hamby’s pregnancy discrimination claims against the WNBA and her team. Congress and the Labor and Justice departments would be justified in examining the facts.”

Just a quick reminder for everyone at home, we’re talking about a professional basketball player taking a few hard fouls and falling to the floor on occasion. Comparing that to legitimate civil rights violations or players carrying a child may sound ridiculous, and that’s because it is.

Joy Taylor Makes Insane Claim About Caitlin Clark’s Popularity And Upsetting White Men, Gets Laughed At

That didn’t stop Stephen A. Smith from showing support for a federal probe into Clark’s treatment.

“I’m not here saying the case will be won by the government if it gets to the points. I’m saying they have a case, they have an argument,” Smith said of the idea during an episode of his show on Tuesday. 

Smith then took the absurdity to an unfathomable level later on when he brought up President Donald Trump’s alleged civil rights violations against Jewish students and employees at Harvard and Columbia. The ESPN personality used those situations as comparisons to Clark’s in the WNBA.

“If the Trump administration can settle with Columbia for a $221 million settlement over what’s taken place on a campus, you think you can definitively rule out what kind of noise could be made if the WNBA continues to allow this treatment of Caitlin Clark?” Smith said. 

We have officially lost the plot.

Stephen A. Smith suggesting a probe into the WNBA’s treatment of Clark is ridiculous. (GETTY IMAGES)

A federal investigation would require a credible claim of a hate crime or a civil rights violation. Clark getting hacked in the paint or taking a shoulder while trying to get around a ball screen isn’t going to qualify.

Basketball is a physical game, and the WNBA becoming more physical, is undoubtedly drawing in more fans. Clark would likely say the same exact thing.

Complaining about the face of the WNBA taking hard fouls and cheap shots should be reserved for discourse on social media. It shouldn’t turn into a column in one of the largest papers in the United States, and it sure as hell shouldn’t be mentioned in the same discussion as legitimate civil rights issues taking place that are affecting a mass of people.