Document Type

Blog Post

Publication Date

9-29-2025

Abstract

The past decade has seen an onslaught of high-profile litigation against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The litigation has almost exclusively consisted of claims alleging that some of the NCAA’s policies constitute anticompetitive practices under U.S. antitrust laws. In National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston, the Supreme Court ruled that, by limiting the education-related benefits schools were allowed to offer student athletes, the NCAA violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. However, the main takeaway from Alston was the concurrence by Justice Kavanaugh, which emphasized that while “the Court does not address the legality of the NCAA’s remaining compensation rules . . . there are serious questions whether the NCAA’s compensation rules can pass muster under ordinary rule of reason scrutiny.” The NCAA saw the writing on the wall. Shortly before the Supreme Court released the Alston opinion, it amended its rules regarding athletes’ use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL). For the first time, college athletes were allowed to profit off their NIL, opening the door to new opportunities, such as personal endorsement deals with brands.

Download
Archived Link

Share

COinS