Rutgers University football player Jett Elad is one of the latest student-athletes to file a federal antitrust lawsuit against the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.[1] Elad’s lawsuit challenges what he calls the NCAA’s “arbitrary and unreasonable” application of its new waiver allowing student-athletes who attended and competed at a non-NCAA school (e.g., junior college (JUCO)) for one or more years to remain eligible to compete in 2025-26 academic year (JUCO Waiver).

With the final approval hearing for the House settlement before Judge Wilken in the Northern District of California set for April 7, the state of South Dakota has continued its battle to prevent that settlement from getting approved. After initially filing a lawsuit in South Dakota state court seeking to prevent the settlement from taking effect, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) removed the case to federal court. However, on March 28, the federal court in South Dakota remanded the case back to South Dakota state court. Now, South Dakota has filed a motion for a preliminary injunction, seeking to block the settlement.

Recently, Pennsylvania’s Saint Francis University announced its decision to reclassify its intercollegiate athletics program from NCAA Division I to Division III, citing the difficulty in governance associated with college athletics, which is only growing in “complexity based on realities like the transfer portal, pay-for-play, and other shifts that move athletics away from love of the game.” Saint Francis is the first school to reclassify its athletics programs in response to the pending House settlement.

On March 13, the NCAA issued guidance in the form of a Q&A defining the scope of the eligibility waiver it previously approved on December 23, 2024, for student-athletes who have competed at non-NCAA institutions, such as junior colleges (JUCO) and National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) schools. The December 2024 waiver[1] extended an extra year of eligibility in the 2025-26 academic year to student-athletes who previously “competed at a non-NCAA school for one or more years,” and otherwise would have exhausted their NCAA eligibility following the 2024-25 season.

How NCAA Division I conferences choose to deal with the implications of the House, et al., v. NCAA, et al. settlement, and in particular the revenue-sharing mechanism known as the “pool,” has been the subject of much speculation and debate. Commentators have asked whether conferences will require participation, or leave…

Texas’s biennial legislature is in session, and revamping Texas’ name, image, and likeness (NIL) laws to keep up with the developments across the U.S. seems to be a hot topic. As of the date of this post, state representatives have filed seven bills that would affect NIL in the state and potentially allow Texas high schoolers to benefit from their NIL.

Recently, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia denied a request from a D-1 baseball player for a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the NCAA related to his eligibility, as well as a preliminary injunction for the same. Dylan Goldstein, an outfielder for his school’s baseball team, sought immediate reinstatement for the 2024-2025 academic year after exhausting his eligibility under current NCAA Bylaws.