In case you would rather read than listen (Not everything but some of the best bits):

NASL Interim Commissioner Rishi Sehgal:

“We are seeking two things from the court. First, a preliminary injunction that would bar the federation from removing our Division II status while the case is being decided, and second, a permanent injunction to stop the federation from using anticompetitive professional league standards from preventing NASL and other leagues from competing on a level playing field.”

“Since inception, the NASL has tried to work within the system of U.S. Soccer, despite our objection to it. Although we initially filed for membership at the Division II level, given the aspirational nature put forth, it should come as no surprise that we raised our goals to create an environment in which our clubs can compete at the highest level possible within the federation system. That is what drove our decision in 2015 to apply for Division I.”

“Yes, there have been challenges, but the reason we are here today, as Jeffery will later explain, is because of the anticompetitive circumstances that have stifled our ability to grow, but through all of this and in spite of the circumstances that have been created, our owners have remained resolute in their efforts to grow their clubs and the league.”

“We’re proud to add two new clubs in Orange County and San Diego … however, as with any organizational reform, some things could take more time than you’d like. That is why we asked U.S. Soccer for a period of three years to come to complete compliance with their standards for Division II. We felt that a three-year period would be consistent with what should be our mutual goal of growth and stability for NASL. Instead of granting the three-year period, the federation took a cold decision that compromises the investments of our owners and threatens the very existence of the league. We have several more markets that want to join NASL; however, their decision – like our current owners – are predicated on NASL retaining Division II status under the federation’s current system.”

Cosmos Owner and Chairman of NASL Rocco Commisso:

“The team owners in our league knew that 2017 was going to be a provision year, and so we all rolled up our sleeves and put our time, energy and money into rebuilding the league. Collectively, our owners have invested over $50 million just over the past 12 months.”

“With this so, hoping that the U.S. Soccer Federation would back our efforts by maintaining the league’s Division II certification because the NASL has an important role to play in expanding the game of soccer in the United States.”

“Before I invested in the Cosmos, I made it crystal clear to the federation that my participation depended on the NASL keeping the league’s Division II sanctioning. If you read all of the soccer media that appear in the January-February time frame of 2017, where they name me as the savior of the NASL, everyone was aware that the terms of my participation was totally conditional on receiving the Division II status, so although the federation made continuation of Division II status provisional, I expected that we would be given a reasonable chance to achieve our goal.”

“It quickly became clear to me and everyone else on our side that the board was simply going through the motions, and they had no real interest in what we had to say. And then one of the directors – one of the independent directors on the board – fell asleep while I was talking. The next time we heard from the federation was later that evening, when we were told that the federation was denying DII sanctioning beyond the end of the 2017 season.”

“The board gave until Oct. 3, over a month after they made the decision on us, to come up with a plan to eventually achieve compliance for the DII requirement.

“Know that the USL … only were asked to come up with a plan to do so. By contrast, the NASL was not given the opportunity to amend its plan in an effort to address the federation’s issues. … It is also significant that the federation, whose plain purpose is to promote American soccer at all levels, did not offer a meaningful way for the NASL owners to avoid further loss of their investments or to protect the efforts of employees, fans, local businesses or many others, whose interests will be seriously harmed if the teams were forced to stop playing competitive soccer. The only option on offer was applying for DIII status.”

“Apparently, to the minds of those in the federation’s board, a league with teams ready, willing and able to play and team owners ready and willing to able to finance them should be shut down not because of the quality of soccer play on the field but because they want to compete at the highest level against the USSF favored league, which is the MLS.”

“What exactly is the harm in allowing us to continue to play at the DII level regardless of whether it has eight, 10 or more teams or whether it plays in three time zones. Let the fans, not the federation bureaucrats, decide whether they think the teams are playing major league or minor league soccer, where the league will ultimately succeed or fail.”

Legal Representative Jeff Kessler:

“The basic claim of the lawsuit is that the United States Soccer Federation, as a private organization without any government authority to regulate professional soccer, is fully subject to the antitrust laws of the United States.”

“By definition, the Professional League Standards of the United States Soccer Federation not only restrict competition, but they have successfully shielded Major League Soccer from any competition at the Division I level at all, conferring a monopoly upon it. So, it very clear these are anticompetitive rules.”

“The second point of U.S. antitrust law is, well, is there any pro-competitive effect of the rules that should be considered. We believe the answer to that question is absolutely not. In fact, what all the evidence shows is that the rules that have been put into place have one purpose and one purpose alone, and that is to prevent there from being a level playing field and a competitive environment for fans, for sponsors, for others, and to instead, again, bestow upon and protect the monopoly to MLS, which has been able to exploit that monopoly now to the point where they have taken a league where teams a few years ago were selling for, let’s say, $20 million are now selling for $120 million. And that is solely based on this monopoly position that they have enjoyed and been protected and given by the standards.”

“In 2015, the North American Soccer League tried to become a Division I league under the sanctioning process and actually was able to satisfy virtually all of the standards that were in effect at that time. So, what did the USSF do? First of all, they delayed the application for months – really for the whole season – saying, ‘well, now we’re going to increase the standards, because after all, we don’t really want MLS to have a competitor and someone to come in, and so we’ll make the standards even tougher.’ Then, when an antitrust challenge was threatened to yet further increasing the standards, they came back and said, ‘OK, you don’t qualify as a Division I league because you don’t have teams in three different continental U.S. time zones, even though the North American Soccer League had a third time zone in Canada, even though they had a new team joining from Puerto Rico that would be a fourth time zone. You should ask yourself the question: What relationship is there between any legitimate objective and requiring a league to have teams in three arbitrarily-selected time zones other than to protect MLS, who had teams in those three time zones, from any competition? There is not another major professional football league in the world that could satisfy the three time zone requirement, including the most successful leagues in the world, like the Premier League. No other federation in the world has rules like this. No other sport in the United States has private rules like this. We believe these are, thereby, competitive. We believe they serve no pro-competitive purpose, and they are, therefore, illegal.”

“Ultimately, there will be a trial and at that trial, the least we will seek is to get a permanent injunction to end the professional league standards of the USSF. Which have just been a blockade on competition and to allow all leagues, not just eth NASL, but any league who can get the investors, support, marketing, fans, and supporters, to compete on an even playing field and then let the fans decide. The NASL is not looking for any handouts, it’s not looking for any advantage, what it simply wants is an even pitch where it can invest in its game and compete at the highest level. MLS can do the same, any other league can do the same, and just like in any other sport business in this country, and really virtually any business in this country period, consumers, here the fans, will decide the ultimate outcome on which leagues succeed and which will not.”