NCAA Trial Winds to a Close amid High Tensions and High Stakes

On October 19, 2018, the NCAA athletes submitted their closing arguments, firing away against the NCAA’s bar against compensating student athletes. The critical antitrust trial has centered on collegiate sports wages, with the plaintiffs arguing against the NCAA is, “economically invalid” in its arguments based on amateurism. The NCAA has countered that paying student athletes would harm both the demand for college sports and the integration of student-athletes in college campus. The athletes reject these arguments, alleging in their 51 page redacted brief that…
Continue reading...

Judge Highlights Inconsistencies in NCAA Rules against Paying Student Athletes

The NCAA antitrust trial continues, as Division I college basketball and football players vie for compensation, arguing that the current NCAA provisions illegally restrict player wages. On Friday, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken probed NCAA vice president Kevin Lennon on the association’s limits on student wages, pointing out apparent discrepancies between rules imposed on various conferences. Judge Wilken highlighted a NCAA provision adopted in 2014 that allows five conferences to independently determine their financial aid rules, despite NCAA bylaws imposing cost-of-attendance limits. Visibly perplexed,…
Continue reading...

UW Chancellor and AAC Commissioner Each Testify at NCAA Antitrust Trial

On September 17, 2018, University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW) Chancellor, Rebecca Blank, and American Athletic Conference (AAC) Commissioner, Michael Aresco, each testified in the NCAA Antitrust trial. As we have previously reported, in this lawsuit a class of college athletes are attempting to challenge the existing NCAA amateurism rules and attempting to create an open market for various NCAA schools to compete for top college recruits. Pursuant to Chancellor Blank’s testimony, UW is considering dropping its athletic program in the event that the court forces…
Continue reading...

Sparks Fly on Day Two of the NCAA Antitrust Trial

On September 5, 2018, a Stanford University professor, Dr. Roger Noll, testified as an economist expert on behalf of the college athletes in the ongoing NCAA antitrust trial. Dr. Noll criticized the NCAA’s amateurism rules, claiming that college basketball and football is not a “fragile enterprise dependent on how much players get paid.” As we have previously reported, in this particular lawsuit, a class of college athletes are attempting to challenge the existing NCAA amateurism rules and attempting to create an open market for…
Continue reading...

NCAA Antitrust Trial Starts With a Bang

On September 4, 2018, University of San Francisco professor, Daniel Rascher, testified as an economist expert on behalf of the college athletes. In his testimony, Rascher likened the NCAA to an illegal “cartel” because to their habitual practice of limiting how much money college athletes could be paid. As we have previously reported, in this particular lawsuit, a class of college athletes are attempting to challenge the existing NCAA amateurism rules and attempting to create an open market for various NCAA schools to…
Continue reading...

NCAA Antitrust Bench Trial Set to Begin

On September 4, 2018, U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken is set to preside over a bench trail between the NCAA and a group of college athletes who want an injunction placed on NCAA amateurism rules. This lawsuit, brought by a class of college athletes, came in the wake of the O’Bannon decision, where a court held that NCAA rules prohibiting college athlete’s ability to profit from their likenesses were anti-competitive. However, as we have previously reported, the final decision, in O’Bannon, held that…
Continue reading...

NCAA Asks Ninth Circuit to Adhere to Seventh Circuit Ruling

On June 29, 2018, in a letter, lawyers representing the NCAA asked the Ninth Circuit to adhere to the Seventh Circuit’ recent decision and not revive a proposed wage-and-hour class action lawsuit brought by former NCAA football player, Lamar Dawson. The lawyer’s asked the Ninth Circuit to adhere to the June 25, 2018 Seventh Circuit ruling that upheld the NCAA’s controversial “year-in-residence rule.” The rule mandates that if a student athlete transfers from a division one institution to another division one institution, they are…
Continue reading...

NCAA Says District Court Got It Wrong

Citing NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma where the Supreme Court found the NCAA’s amateurism rules were procompetitive, the NCAA claimed the district court erred in finding such rules anti-competitive and “embracing an analysis that conflicts with fundamental antitrust principles.”  The NCAA emphasized that the Supreme Court held that amateurism rules were valid because they “enable[] a product to be marketed which might otherwise be unavailable.” In a filing submitted on February 11, the organization criticized the plaintiffs’ argument that the…
Continue reading...