In May 2025, former Las Vegas Raiders wide receiver Henry Ruggs III made headlines when it was announced that he was training for a possible return to the NFL, despite the fact that he is currently serving a prison sentence of to 10 years for vehicular manslaughter. Ruggs is now serving his sentence in transitional housing in Reno, Nev., according to News 3 LV.
In 2023, Ruggs pleaded guilty as the driver in a 2021 drunken, high-speed crash that killed 23-year-old Tina Tintor, according to the New York Times. Less than four years later, teams reportedly already looking to give him a chance on a possible NFL return.
Ruggs has also earned vocal support from his former Alabama teammate Josh Jacobs. According to the New York Times, Jacobs said he told Ruggs, “When you get that chance man, don’t look back. One decision don’t define you and who you are as a man.”
This outspoken support for Ruggs’ return represents a larger (and problematic) discussion around elite athletes and “special treatment” across the legal system in general. Ruggs is eligible for parole in 2026, and if he does make a successful return to the NFL after serving prison time for DUI manslaughter, it raises questions of whether or not star athletes truly do receive preferential treatment under the law – something that plenty of NFL fans have claimed in recent years.
It’s not just Ruggs that receives this allegedly preferential treatment from the law, it is a recurring theme throughout the NFL’s star players.
Rashee Rice, the number one WR option on the Kansas City Chiefs and star young receiver, raced and crashed his car with his friends back in, driving at speeds up to 119mph and injuring several other drivers, as reported by ESPN.
He was allowed to play the following year, but got injured in Week 4 against the Los Angeles Chargers when his teammate Patrick Mahomes rammed into his knee, tearing his ACL.
The issue here is not with the legal system itself, but the way that the legal system was seemingly manipulated to fit the needs of these star teams. After initially delaying the trial to allow Rice to play in 2024, the Chiefs reportedly tried to have Rashee Rice’s felony charge and trial moved back up after his season-ending injury. It represents a clear lack of respect for the victims of the incident, as well as the justice system itself.
DeShaun Watson is yet another example of this manipulation of the law by the NFL and the lack of penalty the NFL gives to its star players. Coming off of an MVP Caliber season, leading the league in passing yards in 2020, Watson was accused of sexual assault by more than a dozen women working in massage parlors. According to the New York Times, Watson settled all of these cases and was never indicted.
While he was being accused, the Cleveland Browns traded 3 first round picks, 1 third, and 1 fourth round pick, and was signed to a five year, $230 million contract. The NFL initially only suspended Watson for six games, which was extended to 11 games after public backlash. Watson’s case in particular appears to show how the league’s concern for certain legal issues sits somewhere below their concern for exciting on-field play — though of course, the issue is more complex than this case would make it seem.
Star NFL players fall under the umbrella of “High-Profile Defendants,” a topic which has been explored at length in multiple trials throughout the United States legal system, which continually maintains that nobody is above the law. Indeed, some athletes receive what is clearly non-preferential treatment – receiving the maximum punishment for the crime they committed.
For example, in 2009, Plaxico Burress (a ninth year star wide receiver that just came off of a Super Bowl win with the Giants) initially faced a maximum mandatory sentence of eight years for carrying a concealed weapon in public when he accidentally shot himself in the thigh.
Burress received a two year prison sentence, which practically ruined his football career. He was then released by the Giants and played three short seasons with the Jets and Steelers before retiring in 2014.
Additionally, there are multiple instances of rookies like Justin Blackmon, who was arrested less than a month after being drafted in 2012. He was later suspended indefinitely for violating the NFL’s substance abuse policy in 2013. He has not played since then, which lends support to the idea that star players are the ones allowed to continue their careers after a criminal incident.
While the NFL’s suspension policy is partially to blame for the perceived preferential treatment of star athletes (allowing elite players to continue playing as long their trial is delayed), the root of the issue boils down to a disparity in resources, and the fact that these athletes are often given better representation across the U.S. legal system.
The ability for a player like Rashee Rice to apparently decide when his trial should go through — to maximize his playing time — is a violation of the standard of justice that the United States ought to uphold. More importantly, these allegations of “preferential treatment” for star NFL players point towards a greater issue in the legal system: the fact that wealthier, more privileged defendants routinely fare better in criminal court.
Inequality in the criminal justice system is directly linked to economic disparity between defendants, and while there remains no concrete evidence that a Star NFL player will receive preferential treatment under the law, their financial leverage certainly gives them the ability to delay trials and assemble incredible representation.
It’s not enough to allege that star athletes are not treated the same in our legal system — we must ask where that allegation comes from, and hold the system accountable for this perceived injustice.
