Los Angeles court declares Rams' arbitration clause unenforceable as unfair

In a decision by the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, the arbitration provision employed by the Los Angeles Rams was declared unconscionable and thus unenforceable. The case originated from a lawsuit filed by Brittany Todd, who asserts she was terminated on March 10, 2026 after reporting that her supervisors were heavily intoxicated on the job, forced subordinates to drink, and harassed employees over their religious beliefs.

The Rams had moved to force arbitration, which would have placed authority in the hands of the NFL Commissioner or his designee to decide whether the dispute was "football-related." The judge rejected that motion, citing the conflict of interest inherent in an arbitrator employed by the league that represents all 32 teams. Todd's lawyer, Mike Caspino, praised the ruling, saying it allows her case to proceed in court and benefits workers at the 49ers, Chargers and Rams. This is the third recent court decision striking down the NFL's arbitration clauses, signaling growing judicial resistance to the league's self-policing of lawsuits.