Eight prominent female athletes have filed a legal appeal challenging the NCAA’s historic $2.7 billion antitrust settlement, claiming it unlawfully discriminates against women. They argue that the deal would deny them their fair share of compensation for the years they were barred from profiting from their name, image, and likeness (NIL), violating Title IX, the federal law protecting against sex-based discrimination in education and athletics.
Who Are the Athletes Behind the Appeal?
The women leading this bold legal challenge competed in soccer, volleyball, and track at respected universities. They include:
Kacie Breeding – Vanderbilt University Kate Johnson – University of Virginia Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Hass, Savannah Baron, and Elizabeth Arnold – College of Charleston
Each of them had previously filed objections to the proposed settlement, giving them legal standing to move forward with the appeal.
Background of the NCAA Settlement
The NCAA recently agreed to a groundbreaking settlement, approved by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken, which would pay out $2.7 billion in back compensation to college athletes. The deal would also mark the end of the NCAA’s amateurism model, allowing schools to directly pay athletes moving forward.
Under this plan, universities could share up to $20.5 million annually with athletes, mostly benefiting high-profile football and basketball programs. This, however, is the crux of the controversy: athletes in non-revenue sports, especially women, are likely to receive disproportionately smaller amounts — or nothing at all.
Title IX at the Center of the Dispute
Attorney Ashlyn Hare, representing the athletes, argues that the current structure of the settlement violates Title IX, which mandates gender equity in educational institutions receiving federal funding.
“We support a settlement of the case, but not an inaccurate one that violates federal law,” Hare stated.
“The calculation of past damages is based on an error that ignores Title IX and deprives female athletes of $1.1 billion.”
She warns that distributing funds under this flawed formula would do irreparable damage to women’s sports, reinforcing long-standing inequities.
Pushback from Settlement Attorneys
The law firm defending the settlement strongly disagreed with the appeal, saying that Judge Wilken has already ruled multiple times against the Title IX argument.
They also emphasized that this new appeal could delay the process of compensating over 100,000 athletes by several months.
“These attorneys are pursuing an appeal based on a Title IX issue that Judge Wilken already disposed of correctly, quickly and multiple times,” they stated.
Will Female Athletes Be Left Out?
Critics like Hare argue that the settlement overwhelmingly favors athletes in men’s football and basketball, who generate the most revenue for schools. Meanwhile, women competing in other sports — many of which don’t bring in profit — may be sidelined financially.
“This is a football and basketball damages settlement with no real benefit to female athletes,” said Hare.
She also noted that any effort to exclude revenue-generating sports from Title IX compliance has been explicitly rejected by Congress, and even the NCAA previously supported this interpretation before agreeing to the settlement.
What Happens Next?
The case, filed by Hutchinson Black and Cook, will now be reviewed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. It could set a precedent not only for how athletes are paid but also for how gender equity is enforced across collegiate sports in the post-amateurism era.
As women fight for what they say is their fair share, this legal battle is about far more than dollars. It’s about the future of equality in college athletics, and whether a victory on the field should also come with a victory in court.
