America Now Cares Enough About Soccer To Play FIFA’s Game, And Europe Is Mad About It

By now you’ve heard the broad strokes — Donald Trump called FIFA president Gianni Infantino, Andrew Giuliani (yes, that Giuliani’s kid, now serving as executive director of the White House Task Force for the World Cup) recruited lawyers, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick got on the phone, and then, in a decision UEFA Europa League called “unprecedented, incomprehensible and unjustifiable,” FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee suspended U.S. striker Folarin Balogun’s one-game red card ban, clearing him to face Belgium in tonight’s round of 16.

Trump, naturally, took his victory lap on Truth Social. “Thank you to FIFA for doing what was right, and reversing a great injustice!” I mean, sure, man.

Now, there’s been a lot of takes about whether FIFA’s decision was legitimate, whether Trump’s involvement was appropriate, whether Europe is mad (they are). But here at Above the Law, we have our priorities. And our priorities are: Belgium lawyered up. Let’s talk about that.

Here’s what actually happened, procedurally. VAR rules say that slow-motion replay should only be used for “facts,” such as the point of contact for physical fouls or handball calls, while normal speed video should be used to judge intent. The referee apparently used slow-motion to judge the intent question, which is a VAR no-no. On the merits, both things can be true — Trump’s involvement is gross, and it probably never should have been a red card in the first place.

As Elie Mystal put it on Bluesky, “Suing our way to justice is the most AMERICA, FUCK YEAH thing ever. It was never a red card. And it’s never ‘classy’ or whatever to just eat injustice like there’s nothing you can ever do about it.” That’s a clean summary, actually.

FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee, in its brief statement, did not provide the reason behind its decision — just vibes and Article 27 (Article 27 of its disciplinary code allows its judicial body to “fully or partially suspend the implementation of a disciplinary measure”).

Belgium’s response was to do what any sensible party does when they get a decision with no reasoning attached: they asked for the paperwork. I mean, what does FIFA think this is? The Shadow Docket?!?

The RBFA said it had still not received “FIFA’s decision or any explanation regarding this matter” and sent a letter requesting a copy of the decision and an explanation of the process. FIFA’s response? It decided that letter was an appeal, appointed a judge, and gave Belgium only a few hours to complete that appeal. “While the RBFA was merely seeking legitimate explanations, FIFA itself created an appeal and immediately ensured that it would be declared inadmissible,” the federation said. “All of this occurred while FIFA simultaneously refused to respond to the RBFA’s legitimate requests.”

Brent Scher reported the news that Belgium had “lawyered up” to fight back against FIFA’s decision, per a local reporter for the team. Fair enough… but here’s the thing you’ve gotta know about lawyering up against American lawyers specifically.

Eric Pacifici, Co-Founder and Managing Partner of SMB Law Group, posted, “Your lawyers have an away message up and are on holiday until September. Our lawyers work so hard we have 45% clinical depression. Trust me, you don’t want this fight.”

Okay, clinical depression is not actually a flex. And yet, it *does* speak to a certain ethos.

Meanwhile, SEC Barstool noted, “Our lawyers got Trinidad Chambliss an 11th year of eligibility y’all waffle folks don’t stand a chance.”

(For the non-college sports fans: Trinidad Chambliss is the Ole Miss quarterback whose lawyers, after the NCAA denied his medical waiver request not once but twice, sued in Mississippi state court, got a judge to rule the NCAA had “operated in bad faith,” watched the NCAA file a 658-page appeal, and then watched that appeal get denied too. He is about to start his sixth year of college football.)

Europe is upset about political interference in sporting governance, which, fair. There is no known precedent for a political leader pressuring FIFA about who can play in a game, let alone one so important to a host nation’s chances of advancing. But let’s also not pretend this is FIFA’s first flirtation with corruption. Plus, FIFA quietly did a version of this for Cristiano Ronaldo’s qualifying red card. Weird how UEFA didn’t get its panties in a twist when a Portuguese star got to play. So, miss me with the outrage now.

“Regardless of the sporting outcome of the match,” the Belgian federation said, “(we are) deeply concerned by the way these events have unfolded and will continue, in the hours, days and months ahead, to pursue every available avenue to uphold the fundamental principles of ethics, sporting fairness and the interests of football as a whole.” Honestly, you’d think a sports club with the particular relationship to surrealism that Belgium has would lean into it.

America now cares enough about soccer to play the game FIFA has always been playing — maybe that’s not great, but I can’t get too worked up about it. Honestly, the hypocrisy I really want to talk about is Donald Trump’s apparent turnaround on birthright citizenship.

---

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of The Jabot podcast, and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter @Kathryn1 or Bluesky @Kathryn1