Supreme Court Speaks on Student Athlete Compensation in Alston v. NCAA

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled against the National Collegiate Athletic Association in Alston v. NCAA, affirming under antitrust law a lower court injunction against NCAA restrictions on education-related benefits made available by schools to student athletes. The Court held that the NCAA’s remaining compensation rules should receive “rule of reason” scrutiny under antitrust law going forward, instead of a deferential “quick look” review or an exemption from antitrust law altogether. Under the rule of reason analysis, the NCAA will need to provide a legally valid pro-competitive justification for compensation rules unless a different standard is defined by legislation or a negotiated agreement with student-athletes. Notably, Justice Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion expressly questioned whether the remaining NCAA compensation rules would survive rule of reason scrutiny. Further, the Court’s decision dismissed statements favorable to NCAA authority in the previous NCAA v. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma decision as “stray comments” without binding effect.

Why it matters

The Court’s decision is limited to education-related benefits and does not directly address the legality of NCAA rules regarding student-athlete compensation for name, image, likeness (NIL) licenses or commercial endorsements. However, the decision clarifies that such rules will be subject to the higher standard of rule of reason scrutiny and signals that current NIL rules may not survive challenge under antitrust law.

As things currently stand, NCAA prohibitions on NIL compensation will become illegal as a matter of state law in six states as of July 1. The June 21 decision increases the pressure on the NCAA to enact changes to its current rules or seek federal legislation rather than rely on legal strategies involving restraining orders against state laws or antitrust defenses.


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.