Earlier this week, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision upheld a lower courts ruling to restrict payments to student athletes just for catching touchdown passes. There has been a long debate over the years about whether or not student athletes should be paid for playing. The Ninth Circuit Court made it very clear that they are still students, and universities should not pay for all of their school expenses either. Student athletes have brought to light that their playing abilities bring in millions to their respected schools every year. In their eyes they find it is only fair that they bank in on some of the school’s earnings.
The N.C.A.A. has also been excused of exploited their athletes, especially men basketball and football players. O’Bannon v. N.C.A.A. made some clear lines for what is and what is not ethical when it come to providing funds for student athletes. This case was sort of a win for the N.C.A.A.; however, the decision to disallow a security payment up to $5,000 may lead to the N.C.A.A. taking this case to the Supreme Court. The courts have reiterated that scholarships may not cover the full cost of attendance, due to some schools coming extremely close to doing so. In the eyes of Judge Jay Bybee, who wrote the majority opinion, it is contradictory to call the athletes amateurs and later state nil-payments up to $5,000 are justifiable. Through the eyes of the courts, the only athletes that should be paid are the professionals.