Why Judge Wilkens Did Not Approve the House Settlement on April 7, 2025

In this episode, I break down three key reasons why Judge Wilkens declined to confirm the House v NCAA settlement during the April 7 hearing: 1) Future Athlete Impact- Judge Wilkens expressed concern that the settlement could unfairly affect future student-athletes who weren't part of the case and had no opportunity to object, potentially settling a troubling legal precedent. She asked the attorney to provide legal precedent to justify the 10 year Injunction which will impact future student athletes.  2) Roster Limits - She challenged the immediate implementation of roster size limits, suggesting that current student-athletes should be "grandfathered in" to protect their roster spots or that limits should be phased in over time.  3) $600 Dollar Review on Third party NIL Deals - Judge Wilkens questioned the logic behind questioning deals over $600. She pressed the attorneys to explain how the $600 limit would benefit student-athletes.  Go to my home page to jillmcbridebaxter.com to set up a meeting.  https://linktr.ee/jillmcbridebaxter  Get on my email list or sign up for one of my free classes.    

Om Podcasten

With over 35 years of experience as a Sports Law Attorney, Jill McBride Baxter brings clarity and expert insight to the complex legal landscape of college athletics. In this long-running podcast, now in its 6th season with 200+ episodes, Jill covers timely and relevant sports law issues affecting college football coaches, athletic administrators, and the media. From NCAA rules to NIL, employment contracts, compliance, and athlete rights, each episode offers straightforward legal guidance, real-world analysis, and practical advice—without the legal jargon or the invoice. ⸻