Supreme Court lets new amateur athlete scholarship compensation rules stand
- The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the longstanding Ed O'Bannon case, which called for legal action against universities for violating antitrust laws in the marketing and profiting from student athlete likenesses.
- The 2009 lawsuit, which yielded a $40 million settlement for more than 100,000 former student-athletes, currently allows for schools to pay full cost of tuition scholarships to athletes, and cost-of-living expenses.
- Observers say that the Supreme Court's decision leaves the NCAA vulnerable to other lawsuits which could change the definition of amateurism, and the labor market of college athletics.
In many ways, the labor movement for collegiate athletes resembles the effort of adjunct faculty members to unionize and secure higher wages and jobs stability. Both sides are seeking equal pay for what they deem to be equal work, with institutions arguing on behalf of an antiquated labor system that now, cannot afford reformation in pay or benefits.
The core of the issue is what smaller institutions will do with further court rulings on pay for athletes. Some economists suggest that the billions moving in and around power conferences will always be there, but for mid-major and historically black Division I institutions, any further court action could force a move to Division II, or out of the NCAA completely.