- Joined
- Dec 10, 2016
- Messages
- 58
How can you make this argument about “legal brain trust” with presumably a straight face?
A little background on how NIL came to be national law. The State of California got ahead of the nation and passed an NIL law. Because it was a state law, it applied only to California universities and only benefitted them. The NCAA challenged that law in federal court, and lost at the District Level. The NCAA and its “legal brain trust” as you call them then appealed the district court decision until it reached the US Supreme Court. Had the NCAA not appealed and just accepted the loss, NIL would have only applied to California universities. But by appealing, arguing and losing before the US Supreme Court, the NCAA legal brain trust turned California law into national law. These are the geniuses you refer to as a ”legal brain trust”
Those lawyers should be fired for not anticipating a loss before the US Supreme Court. None of the 9 justices played college sports. Most of them are hard core capitalists who could not even understand how an organization could prevent a person form benefitting from their own NIL. This was the one of the easiest decisions to anticipate in recent Supreme Court history.
John Ruiz and his legal team will run circles around the hacks employed by the NCAA. He has already proven that his legal acumen is greater than every lawyer at the NCAA. This is not even a close call. ****, by the time the lawsuits are said and done, John Ruiz may own the NCAA. I guarantee that his first order of business will be to FIRE their “legal brain trust”.
Just a point of clarity that technically there is no national NIL law. The SCOTUS ruling in NCAA v Alston had nothing to do with NIL directly but rather the limits/restrictions the NCAA placed on non-athletic incentives/benefits a student-athlete could receive removing any doubt what the courts thought of the NCAA's antitrust status and you are now seeing schools announce academic incentives for student athletes in addition to their cost of living stipends.
Now what did happen in the SCOTUS opinion on the Alston case was to eviscerate their model basically foretelling that any challenge to NIL or restrictions on student-athlete earning would obviously not have a legal leg to stand on.
So immediately in the wake of Alston the NCAA came out with their NiL guidelines all the while while continuing to lobby congress to pass national NIL legislation. With little Congressional support for said law, they realized they had better actually begin to provide additional guidance to their member schools on NIL, which was just released, and begin enforcement of said guidelines. Individual states continue to pass and amend their own NIL laws and many of the state legislatures that passed early NIL laws are amending their laws to be more favorable to the schools within their borders
The NCAA's dubious position and legal fumbling of Alston and NIL ultimately led to Emmert's firing and you will continue to see the conferences take on more of the decision making that they feel are best for their members with strong coordination amongst the Power 5 and Group of 5 schools respectively.
Exciting times.