Michael LeRoy is the LER Alumni Professor and an expert in labor law at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. LeRoy, also the author of “Collective Bargaining in Sports and Entertainment,” spoke with News Bureau business and law editor Phil Ciciora about the potential consequences of the court case Johnson v. NCAA. LeRoy submitted an amicus brief in Johnson v. NCAA to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit to provide guidance on whether college athletes ought to be considered employees who are eligible for wages.
What would a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs in Johnson v. NCAA mean, and how important would it be to the future of NCAA sports?
It would potentially be the most important ruling in college athletics since the NCAA was formed in 1906. At that time, college sports – especially football – were plagued by cheating. Teams would, for example, add professional baseball players and boxers to their rosters for Saturday games. The newly formed NCAA banned anyone who was paid to play a sport from playing college athletics.
A ruling in favor of the plaintiffs in Johnson v. NCAA would mark the first time in 117 years that a court hasn’t accepted at face value the NCAA’s rules against pay-for-play. The appeals court would then return the matter to a lower court, which would eventually seat a jury to decide the amateurism-versus-employment issue.
There are more than half a million NCAA athletes at over 1,100 NCAA colleges and universities. If the court were to...
Pakistani actress and model Ayesha Omar has strongly denied a controversial statement falsely attributed to her on social media. In recent days, a statement circulated online claiming that the act...