A new federal lawsuit in Chicago is taking direct aim at the NCAA's latest age-based eligibility rule, accusing the governing body of cutting short thousands of college athletes' careers and the name, image, and likeness money that can come with them. The proposed class action, filed June 25, says the Division I policy change adopted this month blocks some athletes from a fifth season and that the rule will not apply retroactively, leaving out players who used up their eligibility at the end of the 2025-26 academic year.
The Chicago complaint
As reported by Reuters, former University of California, Berkeley guard Dejuan Campbell filed the proposed class action on June 25 in federal court in Chicago, captioned Dejuan Campbell v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, No. 1:26-cv-07467, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The complaint says Campbell played four seasons for Cal, lost the chance at a fifth year of competition and additional NIL earnings, and is suing on behalf of “thousands” of current and former Division I athletes who will have exhausted four years of eligibility by the end of the 2025-26 academic year. According to the filing, plaintiffs' counsel include Kenneth Wexler and Justin Boley of Wexler Boley & Elgersma and Daniel Gustafson and Karla Gluek of Gustafson Gluek.
How the new rule works
The Division I Cabinet unanimously approved the age-based eligibility model during meetings held June 23-24. The rule gives athletes up to five years of eligibility that start either when they first enroll full time or at the beginning of the academic year after they turn 19. According to the NCAA, the change is meant to “eliminate aspects of the rules that have proven difficult to administer” and make roster management simpler for schools. The new model will fully apply to prospects enrolling in fall 2027, while schools may choose to use the more favorable approach for certain students who enroll in 2026-27. The NCAA also set a July 31, 2026, deadline for waiver requests under the current system, a date that could drive a rush of last-minute filings and fights.
Why athletes say it is unfair
Plaintiffs argue that by declining to apply the new clock retroactively, the NCAA effectively cut out a group of athletes who already completed four seasons under the old system and now cannot claim the extra year that the age-based approach would otherwise allow, according to reporting by The Washington Post. That gap is especially painful, the suit says, for players who mapped out their athletic careers and NIL opportunities around a five-year window, only to have their college run end earlier than they anticipated. The complaint contends those athletes are being harmed both competitively and financially and asks the court for classwide relief.
Where the legal fight could go
The case lands while the NCAA is already juggling a stack of lawsuits over eligibility and athlete compensation, and the complaint explicitly links Campbell's challenge to the broader wave of legal attacks that followed the latest round of rulemaking, as noted by Reuters. Judges could be asked to pause enforcement of the age-based model or to certify a class that would seek damages. If the lawsuit moves forward in a significant way, it could complicate roster planning for schools and reignite fights over who should share in NIL revenue. The complaint also points out that the NCAA had not yet entered an appearance in the case at the time of filing, leaving an early window for emergency motions or possible settlement discussions.
Coaches and schools are watching
Coaches and athletic directors have already warned that shifting eligibility standards can scramble rosters and recruiting boards in the short term, concerns highlighted in coverage by the Boston Globe. The NCAA, for its part, says the age-based system will eventually deliver clearer, easier-to-administer rules. The early wave of litigation suggests that the transition will be anything but smooth. For athletes caught in the middle of overlapping policy timelines, the next few weeks and months may be their last realistic shot to chase another season or seek compensation through lawsuits or last-ditch waiver requests.
