Anything is "subject to the legal process"...
The athletes agree to it...no one is forcing them to compete in the IFBB...
Your example is ridiculous, and not only against the law, but discrimination at it's worst..
Yes, it was a ridiculous example, but only to prove the point using an extreme.
Now, to your other contention that the athletes "agree to it".
Just because the Pros sign an IFBB contract, whether they are being forced to compete or not (your words), does not mean it is legal.
Chick the IFBB can not engage in antitrust tactics to limit their competition, such as non compete clauses. And just because the IFBB puts that non compete clause in their contract does not mean it carries the weight of law-and it in fact does not.
Let me give you another example, one that is very common and happens all the time in contract law.
Suppose the IFBB puts a clause in their contract that if any lawsuits were to arise out of the contract, such as a dispute like Lee Priest's, where Lee was suspended for doing the PDI show, and the IFBB contract stated if they won the lawsuit the Pro would be liable for ALL IFBB legal fees including lawyer fees. BUT, the contract went on to state that if the Pro were to win the lawsuit that the IFBB was did not have to pay the Pro's legal fees, including lawyer fees. Now Chick, this type of clause is included in contracts all the time, but the question is would that clause be upheld?
OK Chick, tell me, is that legal for the IFBB to do-just because they put it in and the Pro agreed, and signed the contract?