Show summary Hide summary
Ohio’s highest court restored a preliminary injunction that clears a group of college basketball players who began school in 2022 to compete this season, a ruling with immediate impact as the NCAA season approaches in November. The decision deepens an ongoing legal fight over the association’s new age-based eligibility rule.
Court order returns eligibility for the class of 2022
The Ohio Supreme Court on Thursday upheld a lower-court injunction requiring the NCAA to permit certain athletes who enrolled in 2022 an additional year of competition. The ruling reversed a recent appeals-court decision and preserves the players’ ability to participate at the start of the season.
Ohio Supreme Court grants athletes an extra year of eligibility after governor intervenes
Wisconsin’s Sebastian Cheeks draws growing NFL draft interest
Plaintiffs in the case, identified in court filings as college basketball players who challenged the policy, posted the order on X after it was issued. The injunction remains in effect while the underlying lawsuit proceeds.
Governor’s executive order played a role
State leadership intervened while the case moved through appeals. Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine issued an executive order directing schools to allow affected 2022 enrollees another year of eligibility, provided they meet the NCAA’s age criteria and have not engaged in professional competition.
The state supreme court requested briefs on how that order might affect the litigation and cited the executive order when deciding to keep the injunction intact.
Why the dispute began: the new NCAA rule
At the center of the litigation is an age-based eligibility policy the NCAA announced this year. The rule extends the window for athletes to complete seasons to five years — up from four — measured from either college entry or an athlete’s 19th birthday, whichever comes first.
When the NCAA declined to grandfather players who began college in 2022 and had already used four seasons, several athletes filed lawsuits. The first suit, Borovicanin v. NCAA, was filed in June, roughly a day after the NCAA published the new policy.
NCAA reaction and legal response
The NCAA sharply criticized the Ohio court’s decision. In a letter to member institutions, chief legal officer Scott Bearby said the ruling contributes to “uncertainty and disruption” caused by piecemeal litigation and vowed continued legal challenges.
The association also has taken separate action, suing Governor DeWine over the legality of his executive order in federal court. The NCAA has stated it will pursue all available avenues to defend its membership rules.
Next steps in the litigation
The Borovicanin case remains unresolved and is awaiting a final determination. Meanwhile, the broader conflict between state action and the NCAA’s nationally applied rules is likely to produce further court battles.
For now, the immediate consequence is clear: affected players who meet the outlined conditions can be eligible to play as the season opens, even as the legal fight continues.
