As the world eagerly anticipates the kickoff of the Paris 2024 Olympics this week, headlines buzz with stories about the athletes, the cleanliness of the Seine River, and the cutting-edge role of artificial intelligence in capturing the games. But for UCLA Law professor Steven Bank, the legal landscape of the Olympics takes the spotlight.

Bank, the Paul Hastings Professor of Business Law, is a renowned authority on the intersection of sports and law. His writings cover a range of issues, from the authority of international sports bodies to the rights of college athletes and the implications of Olympic whistleblowers. In his course, “International and Comparative Sports Law,” students delve into the legal complexities of the global sports arena, exploring topics such as competition integrity, athlete protection and sports commercialization, while considering the reforms aimed at addressing these challenges.

We chatted with Bank about the unique legal intricacies of the Olympics and what to watch for in the Paris 2024 Games.

What are the three legal complexities you will be paying the most attention to this Olympics season — and why? 

Demonstrations and protests 

The Olympics offers an unparalleled platform for the kinds of demonstrations, protests and other expressions of political viewpoints that have dominated the news in the last year. Although such activities are protected by free speech in the U.S. and other countries, the International Olympic Committee limits it in ways that might be tested during a Games that are being held in a year in which demonstrations, protests, and sit-ins have been widespread on college campuses and around the world.

For Olympic athletes, coaches, and other staff and workers, Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter, which participants agree to be bound by as a condition of their participation in the Games, states that “No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas.” The Guidelines on Athlete Expression for the Paris Games clarify that athletes may not express their views during official ceremonies (such as opening or closing ceremonies or medal ceremonies), on the field of play during competition or at the Olympic Village, but they may express their views in other forums, such as in media interviews, on social media or on the field of play before competition, such as during introductions, but the political expression may not be targeted at people, countries, and/or their dignity, it may not be “disruptive,” and it may not constitute or signal discrimination, hatred, hostility or the potential for violence. These guidelines are drafted vaguely enough that they could be used to apply to effectively suppress most political expression at the Games.

The guidelines are also vague on the possible sanctions for violation of the “no disruption” policy. It only states: “Participants may expect that any sanction will be proportionate to the level of disruption and degree to which the infraction is not compatible with the Olympic values.”

Security

In preparation for the Games, France passed Law 2023-380, which enhances security powers to not only protect against terrorism, but also demonstrations generally. What makes this law particularly controversial is that it permits the use of artificial intelligence-powered surveillance systems that allow it to quickly scan camera images to identify security risks and “maintain public order” in a way that observers worry could threaten privacy protections. As with IOC Rule 50, the concern is also that this will be used to prevent public protests of any kind at or around the Games.

Anti-doping enforcement

The World Anti-Doping Agency is under scrutiny because of revelations about the failure to disclose the failed tests of 23 Chinese swimmers at the last summer Olympics in Tokyo. This came on the heels of the doping case involving Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva, who was allowed to compete at the Beijing Winter Olympics despite testing positive for a banned substance at the Russian Championships, which was not disclosed until after she had competed and apparently won the gold medal. There will be significant pressure at these games to avoid additional threats to its credibility as a neutral regulatory body.

How do the Olympics factor into your teaching?

In my course on international and comparative sports law, I’ve taught about a variety of subjects that connect to the Olympic Games, such as Olympics eligibility disputes; the reviewability of contested decisions by event officials; the interpretation and application of the World Anti-Doping Code to matters such as the doping violation of Valieva in the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing; the operation of the Court of Arbitration for Sports and the Ad Hoc division arbitration panels that will be on-site to render decisions for issues that come up during the games; and issues such as athletes rights regarding marketing.   

What’s your favorite Olympic sport to watch. Why?

My favorite sport is soccer (or football, as it is called in most parts of the world), which was first offered at the Olympics in 1900. That was the first time Paris hosted the Olympics, so this is a return to the Olympic origins of the sport. It has lost some of its luster as a men’s Olympic sport since 1992, when FIFA limited men’s teams to primarily U23 (under 23 years old) players, but with both the men’s and women’s U.S. teams qualifying for this year’s games, it is still an exciting opportunity to watch them play against some of the best teams around the world.