Context:

Eight female college athletes from soccer, volleyball, and track and field have filed an appeal against the NCAA antitrust settlement, arguing it violates Title IX by unfairly allocating funds. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement, which allows for direct payments to athletes, but the plaintiffs claim it disproportionately benefits male athletes, particularly in football and basketball. The athletes, represented by attorney Ashlyn Hare, assert that the settlement calculation fails to account for $1.1 billion in damages owed to female athletes, undermining the principles of gender equity. The appeal will be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, challenging the distribution of a $2.7 billion back pay settlement for athletes previously restricted from monetizing their name, image, and likeness. The legal team argues the current settlement could lead to further discrimination in college sports, impacting scholarships and roster positions for women athletes in non-revenue sports.

Dive Deeper:

• The appeal, led by athletes from universities such as Vanderbilt and the College of Charleston, challenges the fairness of a $2.7 billion antitrust settlement approved by Judge Claudia Wilken, which is intended to compensate athletes for previously being barred from profiting off their name, image, and likeness.

• Ashlyn Hare, representing the athletes, argues that the settlement violates Title IX by failing to equitably distribute funds to female athletes, potentially depriving them of $1.1 billion and causing significant harm to women’s sports.

• The settlement is criticized for disproportionately benefiting male athletes in revenue-generating sports like football and basketball, despite Congress and the NCAA previously rejecting exemptions for these sports from Title IX mandates.

• The legal team asserts that the miscalculation of past damages based on the settlement's framework ignores federal anti-discrimination laws and could result in further marginalization of female athletes, particularly affecting those in non-revenue sports.

• The case, filed by Hutchinson Black and Cook, will be reviewed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, aiming to address the alleged inequities and ensure compliance with Title IX's requirements for gender equality in collegiate sports.

• The settlement, while paving the way for direct university payments to athletes, has sparked controversy over its potential to undermine the financial and competitive landscape of women's collegiate sports, risking scholarship reductions and roster cuts for female athletes.

• The appeal reflects broader concerns within collegiate athletics regarding the equitable treatment and compensation of female athletes, highlighting ongoing debates about gender equity and the economic model of college sports.