FirstAlerts

Federal Prosecutors Reportedly Open Criminal Investigation Into LA Clippers Over Salary-Cap Allegations

TMZ reports federal prosecutors have launched a criminal investigation into the Los Angeles Clippers and owner Steve Ballmer over allegations the team skirted NBA salary-cap rules in connection with Kawhi Leonard.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Sep 10, 2026, 8:33 p.m. ETWritten Sep 10, 2026, 9:22 p.m. ET
Federal prosecutors have reportedly launched a criminal investigation into the Los Angeles Clippers over allegations the team skirted the NBA's salary-cap rules in connection with Kawhi Leonard, according to TMZ. The report, published on , names the Clippers and Steve Ballmer as defendants. The matter is at the charging stage, per TMZ. No further details of the allegations, the charges or the status of the case were available in the report, and the investigation is developing. The Clippers and Steve Ballmer are presumed innocent. No trial has been held, and no finding of guilt has been made. TMZ is the sole source for these facts. The report has not been confirmed by an authority, and the cause or basis of the reported investigation has not been determined.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 111 Sept 2026, 01:22current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.