READ MORE: More reaction to the lawsuit and the rule
• Most allow NIL deals, Ohio does not: The lawsuit says multiple times that while the OHSAA bans NIL deals for high schoolers, the vast majority of states allow them. Ohio is only one of six states that still doesn’t.
• Losing money, constricting speech: The lawsuit says that the ban costs talented high school athletes opportunities that aren’t a problem in other states. For example, the suit said Jamier was offered over $100,000 for a deal to use his name and likeness for trading cards, though it says he was also approached by sports brands and local businesses. The suit says the ban encourages talented athletes to leave Ohio for neighboring states that allow NIL deals, and suppresses the free expression of the state’s high schoolers.
• Previous try: The suit acknowledges that OHSAA held a vote on whether to change its high school NIL rules, but says when the vote failed it was never revisited. That vote was in 2022, when member schools voted down the proposal by more than a two to one margin at 538 to 254.
• What they want: The lawsuit asks the judge to issue an immediate order to keep OHSAA from enforcing the NIL deal ban, and one to make OHSAA permit NIL deals for high schoolers. It also asks for OHSAA to pay compensatory and treble damages, meaning triple what they say that Jamier suffered.
• What comes next: A hearing for the lawsuit is scheduled for Monday. Outside of court, though, OHSAA said in a statement that it had planned to vote on whether to change the NIL deal policy in the spring, but may hold an emergency referendum of its member schools now that a lawsuit has been filed.
About the Author
