The NCAA has agreed to settle a major lawsuit. It still faces many legal challenges

The NCAA, which represents approximately 1,100 schools and more than 500,000 athletes, is no stranger to lawsuits. This has already been in court on and off since the early 1980s defending the amateur athlete model at the heart of college athletics.

However, the organization has suffered a number of losses in court, highlighted by a 9-0 Supreme Court majority decision in 2021 in which justices ruled that the NCAA they cannot limit the educational benefits that universities offer to their athletes. In extremely unanimous opinion in this case, Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested that the organization may be violating antitrust law.

THE MATTERS OF THE HOUSE

House vs. NCAA is a class action lawsuit filed in the Northern District of California before federal judge Claudia Wilken, whose previous rulings in NCAA cases have allowed college athletes to profit from their fame and schools to funnel more money into their hands.

Legal experts warned that an NCAA failure in this case would upend college athletics as we know it, and they were right. The NCAA and the nation’s largest conferences decided this week settle for $2.8 billion and move toward some form of athlete revenue sharing of all those billions from television deals to college football greats March Madness Basketball.

The House settlement was expected to potentially resolve some other antitrust claims, including:

– Thing in California, whose plaintiffs include Duke football player Dewayne Carter, TCU basketball player Sedona Prince and Stanford football player Nya Harrison. It aims to prevent the NCAA from enforcing any rules prohibiting compensation for athletes.

— Hubbard vs. NCAA, which seeks compensation for athletes who were denied educational scholarships as a result of the Alston case. The plaintiffs are former Oklahoma State running back Chuba Hubbard and former Auburn athlete Keira McCarrell, and in the lawsuit they are seeking triple damages for all current and former Division I athletes for 2018.

— A similar lawsuit seeking to overturn NCAA rules on compensation for schools and conferences filed in federal court by former Colorado football player Alex Fontenot in November 2023. The case was decided by a judge should remain in Colorado.

The most important issue for the NCAA if the House approves the settlement is ensuring Congress that future college athletes won’t drag it back to court over the same issues.

ARE ATHLETES EMPLOYEES?

There are many issues before the National Labor Relations Board, including: complaint against USC and the Pac-12; unionization effort by Dartmouth men’s basketball team; unfair employee complaint against Notre Dame; and federal lawsuit in Pennsylvania submitted by former Villanova player Trey Johnson.

All of this could lead to college athletes being granted employee status. Johnson and others are calling for hourly wages similar to those earned through work-study programs. The Dartmouth band, however, voted 13-2 to form a union there are many steps ahead, including a potential legal battle.

The NCAA and member schools insist they do not treat athletes as employees who can collectively negotiate salary and benefits.

ATHLETE’S REMUNERATION

The attorneys general of Tennessee and Virginia filed the lawsuit federal lawsuit in the Eastern District of Tennessee, which is challenging NCAA NIL rules after it was revealed that the University of Tennessee was among the schools at risk of potential penalties for violations. Judge February 23 issued a preliminary injunction against the NIL provisions and concluded that they were likely to violate antitrust law.

ATHLETES TRANSFERS

Colorado, Illinois, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee and West Virginia challenged the NCAA’s rules regarding athletes who want to change schools, talking about a one-year delay in eligibility for some athletes who transfer violates antitrust law.

___

AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/college-football