[ad_1]
The NCAA lost another legal battle Friday when a federal judge barred the organization from enforcing its rules prohibiting compensation for recruits’ name, image and likeness by granting them a preliminary injunction required by the states of Tennessee and Virginia.
It was another blow to the NCAA’s ability to govern college sports and more than 500,000 athletes.
Gabe Feldman, a sports law professor at Tulane, said a congressional bill could save the NCAA, even as he noted it was just a preliminary injunction in district court and the NCAA was expected to appeal. That would go to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which oversees Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio and Michigan.
“There is no doubt that the NCAA has I never faced more attacks. from different areas at the same time,” Feldman said. “And things are snowballing. And I think that’s why there are so many serious discussions about how college sports need to change and what those changes will look like.”
U.S. District Judge Clifton Corker in the Eastern District of Tennessee issued the injunction that undermines what has been a core tenet of the NCAA’s amateurism model for decades: Third parties cannot pay recruits to attend a school in particular.
The judge wrote that the NCAA’s stance likely violates antitrust law and Congress is so far unwilling to grant the association an exemption. The judge said athletes with a limited window are harmed by not being able to know their true value before committing to a school.
While maintaining competitive balance in college sports is “a legitimate and important endeavor,” distributing competition evenly among member institutions by restricting trade is precisely the type of anticompetitive conduct that the Sherman Act seeks to prevent.
US District Judge Clifton Corker.
The decision raised questions about whether boosters will suddenly open the floodgates with offers to potential recruits. Oklahoma State athletic director Chad Weinberg said the Cowboys had anticipated the decision, but “we are awaiting further guidance from the Big 12 Conference and the NCAA.”
The NCAA said it would review the ruling and talk to its member schools about possible policy changes. But the NCAA said changing rules supported by its members “upside down” will only worsen an already chaotic situation and reduce protections that prevent athletes from being exploited.
“An endless patchwork of state laws and court opinions make clear that partnering with Congress is necessary to provide stability for the future of all college athletes,” the NCAA said in its statement the same day. NCAA President Charlie Baker spoke about the situation at the Capitol.
“I think, in the end, we’re going to need Congress to do something,” Baker said. “Because people will draw many conclusions from judicial decisions. And then there will be new ones.”
Helen Drew, a sports law professor at the University at Buffalo, said Baker does not identify any specific bills for Congress. She also said this is all accelerating quickly after the NCAA did virtually nothing for years.
“Why haven’t they addressed this?” Drew said. “The model is falling apart.”
The attorneys general of Tennessee and Virginia filed a federal lawsuit on Jan. 31 in defiance of the NCAA’s NIL rules after it was revealed that the University of Tennessee was under investigation for possible violations.
They maintained that since The NCAA lifted its ban on athletes being allowed to cash in on their fame in 2021, recruits are considering NIL opportunities when choosing a school, decisions that should not be limited. The judge highlighted the NCAA’s argument that allowing so-called NIL collectives (booster-backed business entities) to reach agreements with recruits would eliminate the difference between college athletics and professional sports.
“While the NCAA allows student-athletes to benefit from their NIL, it fails to show how the timing of a student-athlete signing such an agreement would destroy the goal of preserving amateurism,” the judge wrote.
Corker has made clear that he believes the states are likely to prevail in the long run.
Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said the court order ensures athletes’ rights will be protected from the NCAA’s “illegal NIL recruiting ban.” He said the biggest fight continues.
“We will litigate this case to the fullest extent necessary to ensure that the NCAA’s monopoly cannot continue to harm Tennessee student-athletes,” Skrmetti said. “The NCAA is not above the law and the law is on our side.”
Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares called the court order an important ruling for athletes who deserve the freedom to negotiate and profit while the NCAA and its member schools make millions.
“It’s fair that they have more freedom over what they earn,” he said. “The NCAA has taken advantage of talented young athletes for too long.”
Joshua Lens, an assistant professor at the University of Arkansas and former university athletics administrator, called this lawsuit and the judge’s order very specific. Lens said the NCAA can still enforce its other NIL rules. Whether this becomes a national precedent depends on the NCAA’s response.
He The NCAA no longer enforces certain transfer rules after a federal judge’s ruling in December.
“I think the NCAA is going to pause for a minute trying to enforce the so-called NIL recruiting ban,” Lens said.
The court order helps the University of Tennessee, which is facing an NCAA investigation into possible recruiting violations. University officials declined to comment Friday, but its chancellor revealed Jan. 30 in a scathing letter to Baker that the association alleged that Tennessee violated NIL rules through agreements made between athletes and a booster-funded NIL collective that supports Volunteer athletes. Where Plowman called it “intellectually dishonest” for NCAA staff to pursue infraction cases as if students had no NIL rights.
The NCAA’s authority to regulate athlete compensation has come under attack by a variety of avenues forks legal issues They are growing.
The Tennessee case is one of at least six antitrust lawsuits The NCAA is fighting back and also asking Congress for antitrust protections. A National Labor Relations Board official ruled in early February that Members of the Dartmouth men’s basketball team are employees of the school. and could vote to form a union, which the players plan to do.
___
AP Sports Writers Cliff Brunt, John Zenor, Mark Long, Ben Nuckols and Hank Kurz contributed to this report.
___
AP College Football: