The NCAA Was Slaughtered 9-0 in the Supreme Court – Greater Economic Freedom for Black Student-Athletes Now Likely


Eurweb highlights Partner Patrick Bradford’s contribution to the Supreme Court’s decision in N.C.A.A. v Alston, noting that his larger contribution is to the African American community as a whole. This decision opens the door for college athletes to one day realize full economic rights and marks a fundamental shift away from the exploitation of young black labor.

A New Era Dawns In College Sports


Partner Patrick Bradford speaks to NPR on the lasting impact of the United States Supreme Court ruling that the NCAA cannot stop universities from giving student-athletes education-related benefits.

The Supreme Court’s Surprising Term


Bradford Edwards & Varlack LLP is mentioned in New Yorker magazine, which highlights several pivotal Supreme Court cases that arose against the backdrop of the 2020 pandemic and the recent presidential election. Among the noteworthy topics was the unanimous Supreme Court ruling in N.C.A.A. v. Alston, which struck down N.C.A.A. restrictions on education-related benefits for college athletes.

Patrick Bradford works with Tillman Breckenridge in brief against NCAA decision


Tillman Breckenridge is quoted in as giving “all credit to Patrick Bradford for starting things up and really pushing to get the amicus brief,” submitted to the Supreme Court in N.C.A.A. v. Alston, “across the finish line.” Bradford’s efforts not only targeted the anti-competitive practices of the N.C.A.A. but also served to emphasize the exploitation of young black athletes and the disparate impact of N.C.A.A. regulations on African American communities as a whole.

Supreme Court Client Alert: NCAA v. Alston

TRUNORTH Client Alerts

Today a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Gorsuch, upheld a 9th Circuit decision that the NCAA’s rules for compensating Division I football and basketball players are subject to a full Rule of Reason analysis, and that NCAA conferences and school may permit certain education-related benefits.

The underlying decision involved a district court’s injunction of restrictions by NCAA conferences and schools that imposed caps on education-related benefits to athletes, such as rules that limit scholarships for graduate or vocational school, payments for academic tutoring, or paid post-eligibility internships. The 9th Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision and the NCAA appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court’s opinion upheld the lower courts’ findings that providing certain education-related benefits to students would not blur the line between college and professional sports, and therefore would not lead to a decrease in viewership for college games on television.

College Athletes Call Justices’ NCAA Ruling A Game Changer


Partner, Denver Edwards, co-author of the amicus brief submitted to the Supreme Court in N.C.A.A. v Alston, is quoted in Law360 discussing economic productivity and opportunity for college athletes. Edwards, a former college athlete himself, discusses that marketing is “incredibly important because in the time that you are most productive, these students are able to maximize their economic productivity and be able to go forward and support themselves.”

Modern Day Peonage: A Legal Fiction Stands Between College Players and Their Rightful Compensation


Partners Patrick Bradford and Denver Edwards, co-authors of the amicus brief submitted to the Supreme Court in the case N.C.A.A. v. Alston, discuss the injustice of the N.C.A.A. athletic industry which capitalizes on the talent of young college athletes while simultaneously depriving them of quality education and the financial means to succeed in the future. While this case is rooted in issues surrounding anti-competition, is also serves as a call for justice on behalf of young, primarily black, athletes who are being exploited to perpetuate a capitalist agenda.