Return to Current Litigation

Alston v. NCAA

Editor at Advocacy for Fairness in Sports | Website

Sheilla Dingus founded Advocacy for Fairness in Sports in October 2016, after a stint with Defenders of the Wall, a New England Patriots based blog where she dived deep into the legal aspects of Deflategate. Along the way, she observed many inequities in sports and felt a need to address some of the under-reported stories in sports law. She draws from her background as a former professional dancer, who like many of the athletes she writes about, took an early retirement due to orthopedic injuries. After a return trip to college she worked for a legal software company, with seven years as a Project Manager and Analyst. She brings her analytical skills to the table in breaking down complex lawsuits, and enjoys pursuing her longtime interest in journalism.

Permanent link to this article: https://advocacyforfairnessinsports.org/current-litigation/alston-v-ncaa/

Hollow Victory in Alston Ruling

Alston Ruling Brings a Hollow Victory for College Athletes

Late Friday evening, Judge Claudia Wilken issued a long-awaited ruling in the Alston anti-trust amateurism case, officially known as In re: National Collegiate Athletic Association Grant-In-Aid Cap Antitrust Litigation in the Northern District of California.

While judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiffs, the victory rings hollow.  Note the limiting nature of her opinion, despite for a second time, the first being O’Bannon, she found the NCAA’s practices to be a violation of antitrust law

Judge Claudia Wilken

Advocacy for Fairness in Sports writes letter to Judge Wilken regarding upcoming NCAA “amateurism” trial

Dear Judge Wilken,
Next month you will no doubt hear eloquent and passionate arguments from Jeffrey Kessler as he presents antitrust claims against the NCAA. You will also hear capable counsel for the defense refuting those claims and insisting that amateurism must be protected. Having read the briefs, I feel there are some compelling arguments that have been omitted, and as such, I feel the need to bring them to the Court’s attention after a brief recap of issues that have been previously and wrongly addressed.