Department of Justice Issues Complaint about House Settlement

by Madeline Folsom 7

January 18th, 2025 College, Industry, National, News

The Department of Justice, DOJ, issued a Statement of Interest, SOI, to Judge Wilken regarding their concerns with the upcoming NCAA vs House Settlement.

This complaint comes on after the Department of Education released a document on Thursday clarifying that NIL deals are subject to Title IX standards, which has sent shockwaves through NCAA programs and lawmakers alike.

Sam Ehrlich posted on X about the development, providing the document

The DOJ’s complaint is that the settlement terms are “not in the best interest of their citizens”. Their concern is primarily focused on the issues of the revenue cap, and their belief that the cap does not “cure the ill effects of evil conduct” and that it allows the NCAA to “continue fixing the amount” that schools can pay students.

As a solution, the DOJ wants Judge Wilken, the primary judge on the suit, to either remove the revenue cap entirely or make it clear that the revenue cap is not exempt from future litigation. The complaint document states “The risk that defendants [the NCAA] will attempt to use a private, negotiated settlement as a shield in future litigation underscores the importance of determining carefully whether it is fair and adequate. At a minimum if the Court approves the Proposed Settlement, it should make clear that doing so is not a ruling on the legality of the Salary Cap Rule”. 

The DOJ also included an email from the NCAA’s lead counsel, Rakesh Kilaru, in the statement. In the email, Kilaru makes it clear that while the NCAA recognizes that the settlement will not make them immune from later DOJ action, they intend to use any approval as a defense if necessary. This might make it difficult if the DOJ is intending to sue over the cap because it will have already been approved, hence their request to Judge Wilken.

Judge Wilken has no obligation to make the changes the DOJ is requesting. Statements of Interest simply inform the Judge of the Department’s position on a legal issue, and it signals they are following the case for future litigation.

A new administration will be taking over the DOJ on January 20th, and they have the right to rescind the SOI, which you can read here.

7
Leave a Reply

Subscribe
Notify of

7 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Joel Lin
11 days ago

Sometimes I just sit & reflect some on the abject idiocy that some vainglorious sap like Claudia Wilken gets to determine out of whole cloth how collegiate athletics will be administered. All for what, to affirm standing for Grant House of all people to be able to hold up a local cantina burrito & get paid a lousy 5 grand for it? Just a magnificent face plant all around.

Concerned athlete
12 days ago

Am I missing something or would this complaint by the DOJ not be good for swimmers and Olympic Sport athletes – it will force schools to come up with more money for the football and basketball players.

It almost seems like the best case scenario is for House to go through at this point and move forward. Efforts to delay it likely only increase costs. It is gross how much money the attorneys are making in their process of destroying college sports.

Hereforthecrazyshow
12 days ago

If you spin football (and maybe basketball) into a separate, for profit enterprise where the schools license their brand to the team, then the athletes can be considered employees and can bargain collectively. Then you can have a commissioner as well. That solves some of the problem at the top of the stack. The path to that happening is very unclear, but I do know is that die hard fans are starting to lose interest in the NCAA. That is an existential threat so they have to do something bold.

Snarky
12 days ago

NCAA folds as we know it in three years or less. Tick tock.

Admin
Reply to  Snarky
12 days ago

I think you’re right, barring legislative injunction.

Snarky
Reply to  Braden Keith
12 days ago

Legislature can’t enjoin anything. And the dysfunction of Congress won’t do anything smart. The courts will sort this out and the fallout will be painful across the board. Sad to say.

WestCoastRefugee
Reply to  Snarky
10 days ago

Three years may be generous. There are too many competing factions here for the NCAA in it’s current format to survive.

  1. Per the DOJ, you can’t set a salary cap for college athletes because said cap is not a result of collective bargaining.
  2. The current settlement (also per the DOJ) is not sufficient because the anti-competitive nature of college athletics still remains and hampers the free market.
  3. Still waiting for somebody with more brain power than I can describe how the “free-market” and Title IX requirements for equitable distribution of funds can coexist. From my viewpoint, they cannot.