Q: How does the House v. NCAA settlement affect Title IX and athletes?
A: The House v. NCAA settlement, approved in 2025, authorizes schools to pay student-athletes directly from revenue sharing up to $20.5 million per school annually. But it has created enormous Title IX questions that remain unresolved heading into 2026.
The Title IX Challenge
Within days of the settlement’s approval, plaintiff class members filed Title IX-based appeals, arguing that the settlement’s compensation model fails to provide substantially proportionate benefits to male and female athletes. These appeals paused distribution of back-pay to former athletes pending review.
The Core Issue
Title IX requires that athletic financial assistance be distributed proportionally to participation. If football players receive the majority of revenue-sharing payments because football generates the most revenue, female athletes may have a strong argument that the system is structurally discriminatory.
Regulatory Uncertainty
The current administration rescinded Biden-era guidance on how NIL payments intersect with Title IX compliance, leaving schools without a clear compliance roadmap. Without federal guidance, universities face an impossible balancing act between market realities and statutory equality obligations.
What This Means Going Forward
Title IX litigation in college athletics is expected to intensify in 2026 and beyond. Cases are moving beyond simple “equal pay” arguments to challenge the entire architecture of how revenue-sharing is designed and administered. The Student Athlete Fairness and Enforcement Act currently before Congress would require institutions to take reasonable actions to prevent and remediate abuse, harassment, and discrimination.
Related Practice Areas
SafeSport Defense | The Chetson Firm
This post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Contact The Chetson Firm at (919) 352-9411 for a confidential consultation.