3 min read

NEW YORK (AP) – With Alex Rodriguez’s reputation in tatters, other players who might be on the infamous list of 104 likely are worried whether their names will be made public.

“Our program, which was designed to be confidential, if it turns out not to be, that’s something that causes concern,” union head Donald Fehr said Tuesday.

Baseball’s highest-paid and perhaps most-talented player, Rodriguez admitted Monday that he used banned drugs from 2001-2003 while playing for Texas. The admission came two days after Sports Illustrated reported on its Web site that his name was among the 104 players who tested positive during baseball’s anonymous survey in 2003.

Former union head Marvin Miller called for an investigation of federal prosecutors to help determine whether there was a government leak of the test results, which remain under court seal.

“I think the first question ought to be: 104 names all testing positive, but you leak only A-Rod’s. Why is that?” Miller said.

The fate of “the list” will be determined next by 11 appeals court judges in California.

If prosecutors are allowed to use the list and bring players before grand juries and trial courts, additional stars might be forced to admit they used steroids.

Hall of Famer Goose Gossage hopes the list becomes public.

“I want to know who these other 100 guys are,” he said. “Let’s get it all out in the open. It certainly is not fair to A-Rod or to Bonds. They’re dragging A-Rod down.”

Rodriguez was at the University of Miami’s campus Tuesday morning for a workout session, with several photographers staking out the gym he frequents and surrounding his vehicle. He did not comment.

Hall of Famer Bob Feller said Tuesday he thinks baseball should separate out the accomplishments of A-Rod and others implicated in drug use.

“Maybe they can have two sets of records – one for those who used steroids and one for those of us who didn’t,” he said.

The list was a spreadsheet seized by federal agents from Comprehensive Drug Testing in Long Beach, Calif., in April 2004. The agents had a search warrant for the testing records of 10 players involved with BALCO. When they saw the spreadsheet, agents obtained additional search warrants, copied the entire computer directory and took the records of all the player.

Test samples and records were to remain anonymous and be destroyed, but MLB and the players’ association couldn’t arrange for the destruction with the test companies between Nov. 13, 2003 – when the results were finalized – and that Nov. 19, when the union became aware of the subpoena.

The players’ association filed motions to get the records back and won in three U.S. District Courts. But a 9th circuit panel reversed in a 2-1 vote in December 2006, a decision the panel mostly reaffirmed its decision in January 2008.

The full 9th Circuit then threw out that panel decision and decided to have an 11-judge en banc panel hear the matter. It included five judges appointed by Bill Clinton, four by George W. Bush and one each by Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Oral arguments were heard in December, and it’s uncertain when a decision will be issued.

“I think it’s too close to call. These are very hard issues and they’re new issues. It’s really hard to predict,” said Orin S. Kerr, professor of law at The George Washington University Law School. “This is a lawyers’ battle for people that can hire very good lawyers, and that’s not true in most criminal cases.”

Prosecutors want to ask the wider group of players where they obtained steroids, which might advance investigations. The players’ association, citing privacy rights, claims the search violated the Fourth Amendment.

The case, which could wind up before the Supreme Court, might define what “plain view” means in the digital age. Or the 9th Circuit could decide it on procedural grounds.

“It really depends on how they write it. So this could be an extremely important case, and it could be a very narrow case,” Kerr said. “It’s an unusual case in that the information has value outside the criminal case, which is not normally the case.”

Comments are no longer available on this story