Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Scaevolus 1826 days ago
Alternate headline: "Supreme Court unanimously sides with former college players in dispute with NCAA about compensation" (from ESPN).

Note that this is a narrow ruling about the NCAA limiting educational compensation and what scholarships can encompass-- but some justices gave indications that they disagree with the NCAA compensation restrictions at large.
2 comments
jfb 1826 days ago
Kavanaugh's concurrence is 100% an invitation for a broader restraint-of-trade suit, and honestly, it is long overdue. The NCAA is dead, they've got to settle, but there isn't going to be any real interest in half measures.

As someone who detests the Plantation League, this is long, long, long overdue.

link
crooked-v 1826 days ago
The oral arguments stage made it pretty clear that none of the justices were buying the NCAA lawyers' arguments in general. It really makes me feel that the only reason this judgment didn't explicitly open the field for giving student athletes a salary was that the justices wanted to give schools some time to adapt instead of completely blowing up the current system all at once.
link