High court win for college athletes in compensation case | News, Sports, Jobs

FILE – This June 8, 2021 file photo shows the Supreme Court in Washington. (AP Photo / J. Scott Applewhite, file)

WASHINGTON (AP) – The Supreme Court unanimously ruled Monday that the NCAA cannot limit educational-related benefits – like computers and paid internships – that colleges can offer their sports stars, a victory for athletes that could help keep the door open for further easing to open the decades-long dispute over the payment of student athletes.

Schools that recruit top athletes can now offer tens of thousands of dollars in benefits that include study abroad programs and graduate scholarships. However, the case does not determine whether students can simply be paid salaries for the benefits their efforts bring – tens of millions of dollars at many universities.

The Supreme Court specifically said that the NCAA restrictions on educational benefits colleges can provide to athletes who play Division I basketball and football are in violation of antitrust laws.

This is important in the short term for students who may see schools compete for talent by sweetening their offerings with a variety of educational benefits. It’s also important in the long run because it sets the stage for future challenges of the NCAA rules to limit athlete compensation.

Judge Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court that the NCAA moved “Immunity from the normal operation of the antitrust laws”, An argument that the court rejected. Gorsuch said colleges and universities are allowed “Increased educational benefits … can promote academic performance and enable student-athletes to receive appropriate compensation that is commensurate with the value they bring to their schools.”

Under current NCAA rules, students cannot be paid, and the scholarship a college can offer is limited to the cost of attending school.

The NCAA had defended its rules as necessary to preserve the amateur character of college sport and prevent the blurring of the line between them and professional teams, with colleges trying to lure talented athletes with exaggerated advantages. A lower court had upheld the limits on scholarships and cash awards.

Judge Brett Kavanaugh only wrote for himself, signaling where Monday’s ruling could lead. He said there is “Serious questions” whether the NCAA’s other restrictions on athlete compensation may exist. Kavanaugh wrote that “Tradition alone cannot justify the NCAA’s decision to build a massive fundraising company on the backs of student athletes who are inadequately rewarded.”

“Nowhere else in America can companies get away with not paying their workers a fair market price because their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market price. … The NCAA is not above the law. “ wrote Kavanaugh, who played on the Yale junior college basketball team as a college student.

The case was brought by former athletes, including West Virginia football player Shawne Alston. This was followed by a separate, previous lawsuit by athletes, including former UCLA basketball player Ed O’Bannon and NBA legends Oscar Robertson and Bill Russell, in which an appeals court concluded that NCAA rules were not exempt from antitrust law . That case ended with the Supreme Court declining to deliberate.

As a result of Monday’s ruling, the NCAA itself cannot prevent schools from offering additional educational benefits to Division I basketball and football players. But custom sports conferences can still set limits if they want to.

“We hope this victory in the struggle for the rights of college athletes will continue a wave of justice that will raise other aspects of athlete compensation,” Steve Berman, an attorney for former college athletes, said in a statement following the ruling. “This is fair treatment college athletes deserve.”

The court’s ruling comes at a time when the NCAA is already debating how to change its rules to allow college athletes to benefit from their names, pictures, and likenesses, often abbreviated NIL. This would enable athletes to make money on sponsorship deals, online advertising, and in-person appearances.

NCAA President Mark Emmert last week called on member schools to pass a long stagnant proposal to reform names and images before the end of the month. If they don’t, he will take action himself, he said.

Emmert told The Associated Press on Monday that the Supreme Court ruling will kickstart NIL reforms “more complicated” but “That doesn’t mean that we can’t and shouldn’t.”

An NCAA governing body with authority to pass changes is due to meet this week. Meanwhile, on July 1, six state laws went into effect allowing athletes to receive name and image compensation. The NCAA has asked Congress for help in the form of federal law, but lawmakers are still a long way from getting legislation passed.

The players’ associations of the NFL, the NBA and the WNBA had all called on the judges to side with the ex-athletes, as had the Biden administration.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said of the athletes on Monday: “Decision recognizes that, as with all Americans, your hard work should not be exploited.”

Get the latest news and more in your inbox

source https://collegeeducationnewsllc.com/high-court-win-for-college-athletes-in-compensation-case-news-sports-jobs/