We are pleased Judge Claudia Wilken recognized the plaintiffs have fundamentally changed their case. After misleading the court and the NCAA for four years, we hope any new complaint from the plaintiffs attorneys that may be required or allowed by the court will bring clarity to what they are seeking. It is difficult to predict how any court may rule, but we believe based on the facts and law of this case, the court should not certify a class.
According to the law which the court acknowledged, the plaintiffs must have a current student-athlete represented in the case if they expect to achieve class certification from that group. This is a fatal defect in the approach by the plaintiff's lawyers. Their claim that their hurdle in naming a current student-athlete is a fear of retaliation is without any foundation and counter factual. The NCAA has not and would not stand in the way of student-athletes doing so, if that was their choice. Indeed, we have repeatedly stated in many contexts that student athletes are free to pursue legal redress for perceived violations of their rights.
Further, the judge indicated she may require mediation after she rules on class certification. While we find it difficult to envision a scenario that will lead to a settlement, we will participate in good faith. However, we will not compromise on the core value of amateurism in college sports.
