Alston v. NCAA case was originally ruled on by U.S. District Court in Northern California in March '19GETTY IMAGES
The Supreme Court will "hear an appeal from the NCAA and 11 of its top-level conferences in a case that challenges the association’s restrictions on the compensation athletes can receive for playing college sports," according to Steve Berkowitz of USA TODAY. The justices’ decision to "take the case adds a momentous element of uncertainty to an enterprise that has been shaken by state and Congressional legislative efforts concerning not only athletes’ ability to make money from their name, image and likeness, but also the fairness of their overall treatment by the schools for which they help generate billions of dollars annually." The NCAA has "long contended that while its member schools compete on the field, antitrust law allows them to agree to impose certain restrictions" in an effort to "promote relative competitive equity and to have a product for fans that is distinct from professional sports." If the lower courts’ rulings are "allowed to stand and the NCAA continues to be found in violation of antitrust law, it would lose its ability to determine, on a nationwide basis, the rules about the types and amounts of education-related benefits schools can give athletes." The lower courts have "left intact the NCAA ability to set limits on compensation not connected to education, and the association has unveiled a set of proposed rules changes concerning athletes’ ability to make money from their names, images and likeness." Those changes are "set for a vote in January" (USA TODAY, 12/16).
TWITTER REAX: ESPN's Dan Murphy: "A decision is expected by late June -- right around the time that the first NIL laws go into place, shortly before the NCAA's proposed NIL changes would go into effect. This summer is shaping up to be the NCAA's most transformative stretch in a generation." Sports law writer Patrick Hruby: "My gut reaction is that this is bad for athletes, because Fed Sec judges exist to crush labor and preserve private economic power. ... I'm not at all confident that a Fed Sec SCOTUS will look at a literal textbook cartel that has been found to be violating the Sherman Act and decide that college athletes should be free to exercise their existing economic rights." Sports betting writer Dustin Gouker: "NCAA getting ready for second SCOTUS L in three years." Activist Rashad Robinson: "For too long, the NCAA disproportionately left Black players out of financial rewards for their hard work. ... SCOTUS is finally hearing a case that could change this predatory model."
