Hold up.. Kanye can explain this one.

I don't see how the NBA can force him to sell the team legally. And I personally don't think he's racist. He's an elitest and thinks he's above everybody. Not just African Americans. A racist wouldn't pay Doc Rivers, who's married to a white woman, $7mil to coach his team.

I'll go a little more than just elitist... His birth name is Donald Tokowitz, only vanity would make a person change their Sir Name to gain favor. Id pretty much file him under the category of narcissist.

Exile and I have gone round and round about this. The catch to understanding the legality of it, is perception.

This is not a company he built from the ground up, he doesn't own the IP, or the team name, colors, etc... That is all owned by the NBA and licensed by Donald Sterling or what ever corporation he set up to do the licensing from the NBA.

Donald Sterling is not the sole owner, of the one team yes (even not that but for the sake of argument) but that one team is only a small part of what is the NBA. Its a partnership, and this should be something that people keep in mind when going into a partnership. Before Donald Sterling was allowed to own or lease anything he had to agree to the terms and conditions of the contract that governed that partnership. Unless written by someone very inexperienced, which you can bet these are not, there are clauses that govern conduct (to protect the partnership) along with everything else. If those terms are violated, the lease/licensing/franchise agreement can be terminated with a majority percentage/number vote from the rest of the partners

As I said to Exile, they aren't forcing him to sell; they are forcing him to want to sell. The Clippers go from its present value to $0 (with the exception of hard asset depreciated resell value) if his franchise is revoked. He doesn't want to lose everything so his only other option is to sell it and recoup what he can. The alternative is that he refuses to sell it, the NBA revokes his charter, all of the players contracts are void (just like the NFL those contracts are with the league and have league approval), leaving him with any buildings, buses, cars, merchandise that has the Clippers name on it making it unsaleable until he removes the name which is owned by the league or he pays the league a royalty. The league doesn't want to lose a team and he doesn't want to lose hundreds of millions.

Notice the careful wording in this article. (it is not mere semantics)
Sterling, 80, has owned the Clippers for 33 years, making him the NBA’s longest-tenured owner. On Monday the league filed an official termination charge against Sterling, setting in motion an official vote amongst the league’s owners. The NBA is, for the moment, content to continue that course.

“We continue to follow the process set forth in the NBA Constitution regarding termination of the current ownership interests in the Los Angeles Clippers and are proceeding toward a hearing on this matter on June 3,” said NBA spokesman Mike Bass.

Termination Charge - is to terminate his rights to protected intellectual property. This is where the league has the leverage to force him to want to sell.

Ownership interest - That tells you right there that he isn't the sole owner of the Clippers. The League owns the important parts, like the name.
Reports: Clippers owner Donald Sterling allowing wife to negotiate sale of*team | The Point Forward - SI.com

Exile and I have gone round and round about this.

What do you do for a living Oak? What exactly aren't you at least mildly knowledgeable of? Damn it man. How can someone argue against that ****?