NCAA Faces Proposed Antitrust Class Action Challenging New Age-Based Eligibility Policy

According to Reuters, which first reported the lawsuit, plaintiff DeJuan Campbell filed the case in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on June 25. Reuters legal reporter Mike Scarcella reported that the complaint contends the NCAA’s revised eligibility rules violate federal antitrust law by preventing certain athletes from continuing to participate in collegiate athletics and the commercial opportunities associated with doing so.

The lawsuit seeks class-action status on behalf of athletes who could be affected by the new eligibility framework. Attorneys representing Campbell include Kenneth Wexler and Justin Boley of Wexler Boley & Elgersma, along with Daniel Gustafson and Karla Gluek of Gustafson Gluek, according to Reuters. Court records reviewed by Reuters showed that the NCAA had not yet entered an appearance in the case as of the report.

The litigation follows the NCAA’s recent approval of a sweeping overhaul of Division I eligibility rules. Under the new model, athletes generally receive five years of eligibility beginning when they either enroll in college or reach age 19, whichever occurs first. The policy largely replaces the longstanding redshirt system and is intended to simplify eligibility determinations while reducing the volume of waiver requests that have accumulated in recent years.

Read more: Courts Struggle to Keep Pace With NCAA Eligibility Battles Amid Rising Athlete Earnings

The NCAA has said the revised framework is designed to establish clearer and more consistent eligibility standards. The organization has also created limited exceptions for circumstances including military service, pregnancy and certain religious missions.

The latest lawsuit adds to a growing body of antitrust litigation challenging NCAA governance. Plaintiffs argue that restrictions on athletic eligibility can directly affect athletes’ economic opportunities because participation in Division I sports increasingly carries commercial value through NIL agreements and related endorsement activities. According to Reuters, Campbell’s complaint contends the rule unlawfully limits those opportunities for affected athletes.

Competition law has become a central feature of legal disputes involving college athletics over the past several years. Federal courts have repeatedly examined whether NCAA rules governing athlete participation and compensation improperly restrain competition. The organization’s regulatory framework has undergone substantial changes following major court decisions and settlements that expanded athletes’ ability to profit from NIL rights and, more recently, paved the way for direct revenue sharing by schools.

The new challenge also arrives amid broader legal resistance to the age-based eligibility model. Separate lawsuits filed by other athletes have contested different aspects of the policy, including how the NCAA applied transition rules to athletes who had already exhausted eligibility under the previous system. Those cases likewise argue that the implementation of the new framework unfairly excludes certain groups of athletes from additional seasons of competition.

While the Illinois lawsuit centers on eligibility, it also reflects broader regulatory questions surrounding the NCAA’s role in governing a rapidly evolving college sports marketplace. Antitrust claims have increasingly become the principal legal avenue for challenging association rules that affect athlete mobility, compensation and participation, particularly as NIL payments have transformed the economic landscape of collegiate athletics.

The case, DeJuan Campbell v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, remains in its early stages before the Northern District of Illinois. As Reuters reported, the NCAA had not yet formally responded to the complaint or appeared in the litigation at the time of publication.

Source: Reuters