⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Tenth Circuit hears Wisne versus the NCAA, a dispute over whether college athletes can compete for a fifth season. The old eligibility rule generally allowed four seasons within five years of college enrollment. A new age-based system allows up to five seasons within a continuous five-year period. But its transition rules give no extra eligibility to athletes who used their final season under the old rules during 2025 to 2026. These plaintiffs began playing college sports in 2022 and had used four years of athletic eligibility. They want to compete in a fifth season while remaining full-time students. They say exclusion threatens playing opportunities, scholarships and NIL income, meaning compensation for their name, image and likeness. In July, the federal district court in Colorado granted a preliminary injunction protecting a defined nationwide class from that exclusion. A preliminary injunction is temporary relief before a final judgment, not a final decision on every claim. Before this argument, the Tenth Circuit put the injunction on hold while the NCAA appealed. Rakesh Kilaru, representing the NCAA, will challenge the proof of a relevant labor market and competitive harm, and argue that extra returning athletes would displace other players. The athletes will defend the evidence and argue that excluding this group unlawfully restricts competition for Division One athletic services. The question is whether the antitrust evidence and balance of harms support this temporary remedy.

Wisne, et al. v. NCAA (No. 26-1309) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, argued October 13, 2026.