NEW YORK — A federal judge in Manhattan has refused to let FIFA's American subsidiaries block European soccer's governing body from hunting for documents about the secretive plan to sell a permanent stake in the World Cup and FIFA's other tournaments to private investors, in a ruling that keeps alive a legal campaign aimed at FIFA President Gianni Infantino himself.
U.S. District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas of the Southern District of New York ruled on Thursday, November 12, that FIFA (Americas) Inc. and FWC2026 US, Inc. — the American arms of the world governing body, the second of them tied to the 2026 World Cup in the United States, Canada and Mexico — have no right to intervene in UEFA's application, because they showed no "direct, substantial and legally protectable interest" in it, the Associated Press reported from the eight-page ruling.
"Nothing in this record indicates that the US FIFA parties, or even FIFA itself, will be parties in the contemplated criminal proceedings," Judge Vargas wrote. "Certainly the US FIFA parties have not alleged facts suggesting they would be defendants in such a proceeding." She also questioned why the subsidiaries, rather than their parent body, were the ones asking to assert the interests at stake.
What UEFA is trying to get, and why
UEFA, European soccer's governing body, filed court papers in August in New York, Florida and Colorado seeking American-style discovery — court-ordered disclosure of documents and testimony — for use in a contemplated criminal proceeding in Switzerland against Infantino, whom UEFA accuses of financial mismanagement and wants removed from office. The targets are Thrive Capital, the New York investment firm led by Joshua Kushner, and JPMorgan, the bank that advised FIFA on the plan.
The plan at the centre of the fight, called FIFA Forward Enterprise, surfaced in July and caused an immediate global backlash inside the game. Under it, a group of private investors led by Thrive was to pay FIFA $4.2 billion for a permanent stake of more than 20 percent in a new subsidiary that would run FIFA's tournaments, including the World Cup. UEFA objected in particular to the decision to give Thrive exclusivity to lead the investor group, and last month it formally demanded answers from FIFA about the proposal and about Infantino's presidency more broadly, while threatening a boycott of FIFA competitions.
What the ruling does — and what it does not do
Thursday's decision is a procedural win, not the documents themselves. It removes FIFA's subsidiaries as a roadblock, but UEFA still needs a further court decision granting its underlying application before Thrive Capital or JPMorgan can be ordered to hand anything over. No documents are required to be produced as a result of this ruling alone.
FIFA made exactly that point in response. Its lawyers said the court "has not addressed the merits of UEFA's application, and no documents are required to be produced," and the governing body stressed that the ruling was limited to its subsidiaries. Thrive, for its part, has hired lawyer Alex Spiro — known for representing Elon Musk in high-profile cases — to act for it in the action, according to the AP report.
Why a New York courtroom is deciding a Swiss fight
The case sits in Manhattan because the money trail does: the prospective anchor investor is a New York firm and the advising bank is headquartered there, and American courts can order U.S.-based parties to produce evidence for use in foreign proceedings. That is how a power struggle between two European-based soccer bodies over a Swiss criminal complaint has ended up being argued, document by document, in the Southern District of New York.
The fight also lands in the middle of American soccer's biggest moment. The second FIFA subsidiary in the case, FWC2026 US, is part of the structure built for the 2026 World Cup, which the United States is co-hosting — the tournament whose commercial rights the Forward Enterprise plan would partly have sold off.
Infantino is seeking a fourth term at FIFA's presidential election in March. Anyone wishing to challenge him must declare by Wednesday, November 18 — less than a week after the Manhattan ruling.
What happens next
UEFA's lawyers are now expected to press ahead with the underlying applications, which another court decision will grant or refuse. If disclosure is ordered, documents and testimony from Thrive Capital and JPMorgan about how the Forward Enterprise deal was put together — and who approved the exclusivity arrangement — would become evidence UEFA could carry into its Swiss complaint.
For FIFA, the immediate task is defensive on two fronts: the discovery fight in the United States and the electoral calendar at home, with the November 18 challenger deadline days away and the March election beyond it. Whether any documents emerge before delegates vote is now a question for the next ruling in the case.