Supreme Court Seems Ready to Back Payments to Student-Athletes
WASHINGTON — A majority of justices, representing both sides of the High Court’s ideological divide, appeared ready during oral arguments on Wednesday to allow college athletes to be compensated monetarily for their efforts.
In doing so, they also signaled they didn’t buy the NCAA’s argument that it should be allowed to bar payments to student-athletes in the name of amateurism.
Before the court Wednesday were a pair of consolidated cases that questioned whether the NCAA has violated federal antitrust laws by restricting what college athletes could be paid.
In May 2020, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that it did when it came to the limits on compensation applied to Division I football and basketball players.
The former athletes who brought the case, including former West Virginia football player Shawne Alston, have said the NCAA’s rules are unfair and violate federal antitrust law designed to promote competition.
The outcome will help determine how college athletes are compensated and whether schools can offer tens of thousands of dollars in education benefits for things such as postgraduate scholarships, tutoring, study abroad opportunities and vocational school payments.
“Uncapping certain education-related benefits would preserve consumer demand for college athletics just as well as the challenged rules do,” Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Sidney Thomas wrote for a unanimous three-judge panel.
“Such benefits are easily distinguishable from professional salaries,” he wrote, as they are linked to education and could be provided in kind rather than in cash.
“The record furnishes ample support that the provision of education-related benefits has not and will not repel college sports fans,” Thomas wrote.
The decision allowed payments for things like musical instruments, scientific equipment, postgraduate scholarships, tutoring, study abroad, academic awards and internships. It did not permit the outright payment of salaries.
In urging the Supreme Court to hear an appeal, lawyers for the NCAA wrote the decision would transform student-athletes into professionals, eliminating the pro-competitive distinction between college and professional sports.
“Consumers will likely come to view NCAA athletics as just another form of minor league sports,” the group’s petition said.
Among those who seemed not to buy the NCAA’s argument on Wednesday were conservative Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas, and the generally more liberal Justice Elena Kagan, whose questions focused, in part, on the enormous amount of money college sports generate.
Kavanaugh said in light of the billions of dollars in revenue college games generate each year, “the antitrust laws should not be a cover for the exploitation of the student-athletes.”
He told a lawyer for the NCAA that “it does seem … schools are conspiring with competitors … to pay no salaries for the workers who are making the schools billions of dollars on the theory that consumers want the schools to pay their workers nothing.”
Kavanaugh said that was “somewhat disturbing.”
And Thomas and Kagan sounded like flip sides of a philosophical coin, when Thomas questioned the size of coaches salaries and a time when, as Kagan noted, the NCAA had maintained athletes compensation “at extremely low levels.”
A ruling for the former players would not necessarily mean an immediate infusion of cash to current college athletes.
It would mean that the NCAA could not bar schools from sweetening their offers to Division I basketball and football athletes with additional education-related benefits. Individual athletic conferences could still set limits.
If the athletes were to win, there would be pressure on schools to offer additional benefits, and that could create bidding wars for the best players.
A decision in the case is expected before the end of June, when the Supreme Court traditionally breaks for summer.
In The News
WASHINGTON -- A presidential panel charged with considering the pros and cons of altering the size and function of the... Read More
WASHINGTON -- A presidential panel charged with considering the pros and cons of altering the size and function of the U.S. Supreme Court is instead calling out the Senate confirmation process for justices. In draft documents released ahead of a public meeting on Friday, the Presidential... Read More
WASHINGTON -- On April 15, 2013, two Chechen-American brothers planted a pair of homemade pressure cooker bombs near the finish... Read More
WASHINGTON -- On April 15, 2013, two Chechen-American brothers planted a pair of homemade pressure cooker bombs near the finish line of the Boston Marathon. At approximately 2:49 p.m. that Monday afternoon, the bombs detonated 14 seconds apart, killing three and injuring 264 others. At least... Read More
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday affirmed a lower court ruling that denied District of Columbia residents a voting... Read More
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Monday affirmed a lower court ruling that denied District of Columbia residents a voting member in the House of Representatives. As is their custom, the justices did not explain the rationale behind their summary disposition of the case, though they... Read More
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is beginning a momentous new term with a return to familiar surroundings, the mahogany... Read More
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is beginning a momentous new term with a return to familiar surroundings, the mahogany and marble courtroom that the justices abandoned more than 18 months ago because of the coronavirus pandemic. Abortion, guns and religion all are on the agenda... Read More
WASHINGTON (AP) — The future of abortion rights is in the hands of a conservative Supreme Court that is beginning... Read More
WASHINGTON (AP) — The future of abortion rights is in the hands of a conservative Supreme Court that is beginning a new term Monday that also includes major cases on gun rights and religion. The court's credibility with the public also could be on the line,... Read More
WASHINGTON (AP) - Justice Samuel Alito pushed back Thursday against criticism, including some from colleagues, that recent Supreme Court actions... Read More
WASHINGTON (AP) - Justice Samuel Alito pushed back Thursday against criticism, including some from colleagues, that recent Supreme Court actions in major cases have been done hastily and in the shadows. "A dangerous cabal" improperly deciding important matters — hardly, he said. Alito, in remarks at... Read More