Latest news with #AshlynHare
Yahoo
02-07-2025
- Sport
- Yahoo
NIL Struggles Far From Over After NCAA's House Settlement
NIL Struggles Far From Over After NCAA's House Settlement originally appeared on Athlon Sports. The historic decision to overturn the current NCAA regulations regarding student-athlete compensation in favor of a more profitable era has been made. However, another issue has arisen. Advertisement Less than a week since the House Settlement was finalized, eight female athletes from three different schools have filed an appeal to the landmark ruling. They claim that the settlement violates federal anti-discrimination law against female athletes. The appeal addresses concerns about fair compensation for female athletes and asserts that the settlement itself violates Title IX, a federal law that strictly prohibits sex-based discrimination in education. The eight former student-athletes who initiated this appeal are College of Charleston's Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron, Elizabeth Arnold, Emmie Wannemacher, Kacie Breeding from Vanderbilt University, and Kate Johnson from Virginia Tech University. These athletes are proficient in soccer, track and field, and volleyball. Each of these individuals had previously filed objections to the proposed NCAA settlement, granting them standing to appeal the decision. They, along with their legal representation, contend that former female student-athletes will be receiving an unjust amount of compensation based on the settlement's terms. Attorney Ashlyn Hare has even asserted that female athletes would be deprived of $1.1 billion. In response, the plaintiffs in the settlement issued a statement revealing the consequences of this appeal, as well as stating that Judge Wilken (the judge who made the historic decision) has already made the correct decision to deal with the Title IX issue 'correctly, quickly, and multiple times'. With this appeal set to play out, former student-athletes may be waiting another few months to possibly more than a year before the first settlement checks begin to arrive, putting a halt to the player back-pay settlement once again. Advertisement The settlement has shown that priorities will be given to football and basketball players when it comes to NIL payments, showing that the stars of these sports at the biggest schools will receive a larger chunk of the allotted $20.5 million per year that colleges will be allowed to share with their student-athletes. Related: Arch Manning adds to NIL portfolio with major deal It is also rumored that athletes in sports at those same schools that don't make as much revenue could possibly see their partial scholarships removed or even roster spots cut due to the decision of the settlement as it is now. The appeal is set to challenge these issues as well. With this appeal filed and the back-pay to former student-athletes temporarily suspended, the decisions made in the future will establish regulations and ensure a fair and equitable future for both male and female student-athletes. This story was originally reported by Athlon Sports on Jun 17, 2025, where it first appeared.
Fox News
12-06-2025
- Business
- Fox News
Female athletes contest new NCAA ruling, claiming violations of federal anti-discrimination law
Eight women's college soccer, volleyball and track and field athletes have filed an appeal challenging the House v. NCAA antitrust settlement. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week, clearing the way for direct payments from universities to athletes. The eight women argue female athletes won't receive their fair share of $2.7 billion in back pay for athletes barred from making money off their name, image and likeness (NIL). Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Haas, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of Virginia lead the appeal. They all previously filed objections to the proposed settlement. Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. "We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion," Hare said. "Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports." The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. "This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes," Hare said. "Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case." The appeal, filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, was first reported by Front Office Sports. It will be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Follow Fox News Digital's sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.
Boston Globe
11-06-2025
- Business
- Boston Globe
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, saying it violates federal antidiscrimination law
Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion,' Hare said. 'Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports.' Advertisement The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. Advertisement 'This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,' Hare said. 'Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case.' The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
The Independent
11-06-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, saying it violates federal antidiscrimination law
Eight female athletes filed an appeal Wednesday of a landmark NCAA antitrust settlement, arguing that women would not receive their fair share of $2.7 billion in back pay for athletes who were barred from making money off their name, image and likeness. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week, clearing the way for direct payments from universities to athletes and the end of the NCAA's amateurism model. The athletes who appealed the settlement competed in soccer, volleyball and track. They are: Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of Virginia. They have standing to appeal because they previously filed objections to the proposed settlement. Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. 'We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion,' Hare said. 'Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports.' The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. 'This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,' Hare said. ' Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case.' The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. ___
Associated Press
11-06-2025
- Business
- Associated Press
Female athletes appeal landmark NCAA settlement, saying it violates federal antidiscrimination law
Eight female athletes filed an appeal Wednesday of a landmark NCAA antitrust settlement, arguing that women would not receive their fair share of $2.7 billion in back pay for athletes who were barred from making money off their name, image and likeness. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the settlement last week, clearing the way for direct payments from universities to athletes and the end of the NCAA's amateurism model. The athletes who appealed the settlement competed in soccer, volleyball and track. They are: Kacie Breeding of Vanderbilt; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold of the College of Charleston; and Kate Johnson of Virginia. They have standing to appeal because they previously filed objections to the proposed settlement. Ashlyn Hare, one of the attorneys representing the athletes, said in a statement that the settlement violates Title IX, the federal law that bans sex-based discrimination in education. 'We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law. The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion,' Hare said. 'Paying out the money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable harm to women's sports.' The House settlement figures to financially benefit football and basketball stars at the biggest schools, who are likely to receive a big chunk of the $20.5 million per year that colleges are permitted to share with athletes over the next year. Some athletes in other sports that don't make money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their roster spots cut. 'This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,' Hare said. 'Congress has expressly rejected efforts to exempt revenue-generating sports like football and basketball from Title IX's antidiscrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is the exact same argument the conferences and NCAA made prior to settling the case.' The appeal was filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook of Boulder, Colorado, and was first reported by Front Office Sports. It would be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. ___ AP college sports:
