​The NCAA’s recently adopted age-based eligibility policy has just faced its initial legal hurdle and lost. On Thursday, Judge Chris Wagner of Hamilton County, Ohio granted an injunction that compels the NCAA to permit 24 athletes who graduated high school in 2022 and completed four college seasons to receive a fifth year of eligibility. In effect, this ruling grandfathered those athletes into the newly approved policy, which was passed only a few weeks earlier.
Although the injunction directly covers the current plaintiffs, it could have broader implications by potentially requiring the NCAA to extend an extra year of eligibility to thousands of similarly situated athletes who might now be treated as beneficiaries under the new framework. The NCAA has the option to appeal the decision. Moreover, a legal team that includes Darren Heitner and Ryan Downton has already filed another suit, suggesting that more injunction decisions are anticipated in the near future. Heitner signaled the development with a post on X, stating, “THE FIRST BATTLE IS WON.”
The suit was originally filed on June 24 by 15 male and female basketball players, and has since grown to 24 plaintiffs. The timing was significant: it came just one day after the NCAA voted to adopt an “age-based eligibility model” that would grant players up to five years to complete up to five seasons, beginning either after their 19th birthday or once they enroll in college. The policy also ended the practice of redshirting—where players could compete in four seasons over five years—and erased most waivers, with exceptions only for pregnancy, military service, and religious missions. Beyond expanding opportunities for players, the policy aimed to reduce the likelihood that NCAA eligibility restrictions could face legal challenges.
The players who brought the case did not challenge the new rules themselves. Instead, their lawsuit contended that the NCAA’s decision not to grandfather in athletes who graduated in 2022 and had already completed four seasons unfairly limited their ability to participate and to capitalize on the use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL) during their hypothetical extended eligibility window. In response, the NCAA defended its approach, saying in a June statement that it did not intend to modify its guidelines as a result of the lawsuit. An affidavit supporting the NCAA’s stance was signed by commissioners from the Pac-12, ACC, SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, and Big East, who argued that granting the plaintiffs’ requested relief would disrupt rosters and jeopardize opportunities for other student-athletes currently matriculated under the existing rules. The document noted that thousands of students were already enrolled or would soon enroll under the current framework, and that granting the relief sought could adversely affect those incoming athletes who rely on the current system.