Supreme Court Will Not Review Ruling On NCAA Antitrust Violations

The Supreme Court refused to review a lower court's decision that the current NCAA rules on amateurism violate antitrust law. The case revolved around a suit by former UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon who objected to the NCAA profiting off his image in a video basketball game. The original decision by a district court ruled that the use of the names, images, and likenesses of college players without any compensation violated antitrust law. This was a huge win for college athletes who are regularly exploited in order to fill the coffers of the NCAA and its universities. The judge recommended that the NCAA could pay the college football and basketball players up to $5,000 on a voluntary basis. The money would go into a trust fund that could be accessed by the athletes after they left school. Unfortunately, an appeals court overturned that part of the decision, ruling that the athletes should not get paid but still upholding the antitrust violation. In order to remedy at least part of the violation, the NCAA has already agreed to increase the amount of student aid athletes can receive so that it now matches each school's cost of attendance numbers, which include costs above and beyond tuition such as travel, clothing, and food.

There are still other suits coming against the NCAA that look to somehow get the athletes compensated for the tremendous dollars they bring into the NCAA and the universities. This decision does nothing to stop those cases but does provide additional time for the NCAA to adjust its policies in order to come into compliance with antitrust law.