Supreme Court unanimously rules against the NCAA's limits on compensation for student-athletes

• The Supreme Court on Monday ruled in favor of college athletes in NCAA v. Alston.
• The justices ruled that the NCAA can't limit education-related benefits for college athletes.
• The ruling did not address whether athletes could be paid directly or profit from endorsements.

On Monday, the US Supreme Court ruled against the National Collegiate Athletic Association in a case about limits on compensation for student-athletes.

In an opinion written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, the court unanimously upheld a lower court's ruling, saying the NCAA could not limit education-related benefits - such as computers, paid internships, tutoring, study-abroad programs, and musical instruments - that colleges can provide student-athletes.

"By permitting colleges and universities to offer enhanced education-related benefits, its decision may encourage scholastic achievement and allow student-athletes a measure of compensation more consistent with the value they bring to their schools," the decision read.

It quoted from the lower court's ruling: "The national debate about amateurism in college sports is important. But our task as appellate judges is not to resolve it. Nor could we. Our task is simply to review the district court judgment through the appropriate lens of antitrust law."

The case, NCAA v. Alston, was led by Shawne Alston, who played football at West Virginia University, and Justine Hartman, who played basketball at the University of California. The athletes had accused the NCAA of violating antitrust laws through its eligibility rules regarding compensation for student-athletes.

The court found that the limits violated "antitrust principles," with Justice Brett Kavanaugh writing in a concurring opinion that "the NCAA's business model would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America." The ruling did not address whether athletes could be paid directly or profit from endorsements.

The NCAA previously had a $5,000 cap on what schools could provide above and beyond tuition and room and board. This new ruling means schools can now offer more educational resources to their athletes.

Activists and lawmakers including Sen. Cory Booker and the ESPN college-sports analyst Rod Gilmore have been pushing for unlimited tuition money for student-athletes that extends past their athletic eligibility.

Previous NCAA policy forbade universities from offering further scholarships to college athletes once their eligibility to play a sport ended.

The Supreme Court's decision opens the door for other antitrust lawsuits from former and current NCAA athletes over the cap on education-related benefits or over paying student-athletes.

Black college football players in particular could have the makings of a class-action lawsuit; a recent analysis from the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport found that graduation rates in that group had steadily declined to record-low numbers over the past three years.