Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-512_gfbh.pdf
Page Number: 36

32  NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSN. v. ALSTON 

Opinion of the Court 

that its injunction applies only to the NCAA and multicon-
ference agreements; individual conferences remain free to
reimpose  every  single  enjoined  restraint  tomorrow—or 
more restrictive ones still.  Id., at 169a–170a, ¶¶6–7.

In the end, it turns out that the NCAA’s complaints really

boil down to three principal objections.

First, the NCAA worries about the district court’s inclu-
sion  of  paid  posteligibility  internships  among  the  educa-
tion-related  benefits  it  approved.  The  NCAA  fears  that 
schools will use internships as a way of circumventing lim-
its on payments that student-athletes may receive for ath-
letic performance.  The NCAA even imagines that boosters 
might  promise  posteligibility  internships  “at  a  sneaker 
company or auto dealership” with extravagant salaries as a 
“thinly disguised vehicle” for paying professional-level sal-
aries.  Brief for Petitioner in No. 20–512, at 37–38. 

This argument rests on an overly broad reading of the in-
junction.  The  district  court  enjoined  only  restrictions  on
education-related  compensation  or  benefits  “that  may  be
made  available  from  conferences  or  schools.”    App.  to  Pet.  
for Cert. in No. 20–512, at 167a, ¶1 (emphasis added).  Ac-
cordingly,  as  the  student-athletes  concede,  the  injunction
“does not stop the NCAA from continuing to prohibit com-
pensation  from”  sneaker  companies,  auto  dealerships,
boosters, “or anyone else.”  Brief for Respondents 47–48; see
also  Brief  for  United  States  as  Amicus  Curiae  33.   The 
NCAA itself seems to understand this much.  Following the
district  court’s  injunction,  the  organization  adopted  new 
regulations  specifying  that  only  “a  conference  or  institu-
tion” may fund post-eligibility internships.  See Decl. of M. 
Boyer  in  No.  4:14–md–02541,  ECF  Doc.  1302–2,  p. 6  (ND 
Cal., Sept. 22, 2020) (NCAA Bylaw 16.3.4(d)). 

Even when it comes to internships offered by conferences 
and schools, the district court left the NCAA considerable 
flexibility.  The court refused to enjoin NCAA rules prohib-
iting its members from providing compensation or benefits