NCAA Athletes Win Big With US Supreme Court Decision

Former student athletes who brought a case against the NCAA to the Supreme Court, including former West Virginia football player Shawne Alston, seen here running for a touchdown in 2011, argued that rules on education-related compensation were unfair and violated federal antitrust law.(AP Photo)

In a rare show of unity, the US Supreme Court decided unanimously Monday that the NCAA can’t enforce rules limiting education-related benefits colleges may offer student-athletes, such as computers and paid internships. The ruling could reshape college sports by allowing more money from a billion-dollar industry to go to its players.

ncaa
Former student athletes who brought a case against the NCAA to the Supreme Court, including former West Virginia football player Shawne Alston, seen here running for a touchdown in 2011, argued that rules on education-related compensation were unfair and violated federal antitrust law.(AP Photo)

It is the first time in decades the Supreme Court has considered the issue and is a dramatic win for a class of students who say they were exploited.

The case doesn’t decide whether students can be paid salaries. Instead, the ruling will help determine whether schools decide to offer athletes tens of thousands of dollars in education benefits for things including tutoring, study abroad programs and graduate scholarships.

The high court said that NCAA limits on the education-related benefits that colleges can offer athletes who play Division I basketball and football violate antitrust laws.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court that the NCAA sought “immunity from the normal operation of the antitrust laws.” And he said that allowing colleges and universities to offer “enhanced education-related benefits … may encourage scholastic achievement and allow student-athletes a measure of compensation more consistent with the value they bring to their schools.”

Under current NCAA rules, students cannot be paid, and the scholarship money colleges can offer is capped at the cost of attending the school. The NCAA had defended its rules as necessary to preserve the amateur nature of college sports.

In his concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote, “Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate … and under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different. The NCAA is not above the law.”

As a result, the NCAA won’t be able to stop schools from sweetening their offers to Division I basketball and football players with additional education-related benefits. But individual athletic conferences can still set limits if they choose.

“It is our hope that this victory in the battle for college athletes’ rights will carry on a wave of justice uplifting further aspects of athlete compensation,” said Steve Berman, an attorney for the former college athletes, in a statement following the ruling. “This is the fair treatment college athletes deserve.”

College sports raise billions of dollars from ticket sales, television contracts and merchandise, and supporters of the students say the players are being exploited and barred from the opportunity to monetize their talents. In 2016, for example, the NCAA negotiated an eight-year extension of its broadcasting rights to March Madness, worth $1.1 billion annually.

 Load comments

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *