SCOTUS rules against the NCAA

 

Michael Allio/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images

• For years, NCAA athletes have been unable to profit from the benefits their star power generates for their colleges. A new Supreme Court ruling found that the policy violates antitrust law, a landmark decision in an ongoing fight for student-athletes' rights. [WSJ / Brett Kendall and Louise Radnofsky]
• 
  
• In a rare 9-0 ruling, the Court found that the NCAA’s rule denying colleges the ability to provide education-related benefits to men’s and women’s basketball players and football players violated antitrust laws, forming a monopoly in which individual schools and conferences could not attract players through such benefits. [ESPN]
• 
  
• As a result of the ruling, the NCAA cannot ban schools from offering scholarships, internships, or educational equipment such as computers. A conference or school could still set policies banning such practices, but those schools would then be at a disadvantage when competing for the commitment of a player. [Washington Post / Robert Barnes]
• 
  
• In the majority opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the NCAA was engaging in “horizontal price fixing in a market where the defendants exercise monopoly control,” and then asking for an exception to the Sherman antitrust laws that such a practice violates. [CNBC / Tucker Higgins] 
• 
  
• In a concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh went even further in describing the NCAA’s violations, opening the door for a wider legal argument that could be used when the issue of student-athlete pay comes up. He rejected the NCAA's claim that its entire product is defined by the notion that its workers do not earn a fair market rate. [CNN / Ariane de Vogue and Chandelis Duster]
• 
  
• Meanwhile, the issue of whether to pay any student-athlete whose name, image, or likeness is used in universities’ promotional content is tantamount to a different court case, which asks for the NCAA’s rule to be rejected and for damages based on the compensation athletes would have received. [USA Today / Steve Berkowitz]
• 
  
• More than a dozen states have already passed laws that allow student-athletes to be paid for the use of their name, image, or likeness from other sources, seven of which go into effect in July. Though they could still face NCAA penalties for doing so, the current legislative and judiciary environment makes a rule change, either by choice or by law, possible. [NBC News / Pete Williams]