quote:
They don't really need to. This is a federal court case involving a decision under a federal statute/federal law. Whatever the court decides effectively applies to everyone. It's not limited to a decision under Tennessee law that would only apply to Tennessee schools or a decision under Virginia law that would only apply to Virginia schools.

Correct. I think a lot of people have confused things because there are 3 separate things. There's the case, the temporary restraining order and the emergency injunction.

Tennessee and Virginia lost our request for a temporary restraining order but the Judge had commented that we were likely to win the case. This most recent ruling was for an injunction which we won. (Both requests were to stop the NCAA from being able to enforce NIL at this time).

The main difference between now and then appears to be that the Judge didn't buy that Virginia and Tennessee would suffer irreparable harm if the temporary order wasn't granted prior to the hearing on the injunction (especially since the hearing on the injunction was coming up - and has now been ruled on).

That said, it's worth noting that while reports emphasized harm to the states on the restraining order they emphasized harm to athletes on the injunction. Without seeing all the documents, I don't know if this means that different arguments were laid out or if that's just what reports keyed in on. It appears that Tennessee and Virginia presented more than just monetary losses as evidence of harm to student athletes given that Judge Corker wrote, "it is now clear that the harm is not strictly monetary."

Mars and Spyre were prepped for a loss on the restraining order and injunction without either really effecting the ultimate outcome of the case which they've always expected to win. Most sports lawyers will tell you this case was always going to happen, the only unknowns were who the players were going to be but the Alston ruling made it inevitable.