On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the NCAA can't enforce limits on education-related benefits that schools provide to their athletes, providing some insight into the future of compensation for college athletes.
All nine justices sided with Shawne Alston, the lead plaintiff in the case and a former football player at West Virginia University, who argued that the NCAA’s caps on education-related benefits violated federal antitrust laws.
"Based on what I had heard about the Justices' questions at the oral argument, the result is not really a surprise," said Lissa Broome, a professor at the UNC School of Law and the University's Faculty Athletics Representative to the ACC and the NCAA.
Currently, the scholarship money that colleges can offer is capped at the cost of attending the school. This ruling suggests that colleges will now be able to offer athletes extra money to cover other educational assets like study-abroad programs and graduate scholarships.
What makes this case particularly compelling, though, is that it could open the door for challenges to the NCAA rule that prohibits college athletes from being paid.
In his concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that "there are serious questions whether the NCAA's remaining compensation rules can pass muster under ordinary rule of reason scrutiny."
"This language obviously invites further challenges," Broome said. "Whether there will be legislation or a negotiated agreement between the NCAA and student-athletes or additional legal challenges remains to be seen."
The ruling affects the NCAA's ability to limit education-related benefits, but not sports conferences like the ACC.
"The ACC will continue to evaluate the Supreme Court decision that was delivered this morning," ACC commissioner Jim Phillips said in a statement. "The ruling by the Justices provides clarity surrounding educationally based benefits and we look forward to engaging our conference membership in our efforts to best serve and support our student-athletes."
