SMU Law Review
ORCID (Links to author’s additional scholarship at ORCID.org)
Abstract
Courts have long held that collegiate athletes’ athletics participation does not constitute a liberty or property interest afforded constitutional due process protection. Thus, universities, athletics departments, and coaches generally have not had to provide much process when suspending athletes from their teams for disciplinary reasons, for example.
Recently, however, college athletics’ primary governing entity—the National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA)—altered its longstanding rules to permit athletes to accept remuneration from third parties for the use of their names, images, and likenesses. This newfound ability has significantly benefited athletes in college athletics’ transformative name, image, and likeness (NIL) era.
This Article examines the effect of collegiate athletes’ ability to accept NIL compensation on their due process rights. More specifically, it addresses the question whether the NCAA’s shift armed athletes with the added and unanticipated benefit of due process safeguards in instances where universities or athletics departments seek to withhold them from athletics participation for disciplinary reasons. To do so, this Article explores the following: (1) the current regulatory status of NIL in college athletics; (2) a 2024 District Court decision classifying an athlete’s ability to earn NIL compensation during athletics participation as a constitutionally protected interest and how it overlooks key components of relevant authorities; and (3) the decision’s numerous and significant ramifications for athletes, athletics departments, and universities.
Recommended Citation
Josh Lens,
Collegiate Athletes’ Name, Image, and Likeness as a Constitutionally Protected Interest,
78
SMU L. Rev.
41
(2025)
