{"id":703186,"date":"2026-06-14T08:03:14","date_gmt":"2026-06-14T08:03:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/703186\/"},"modified":"2026-06-14T08:03:14","modified_gmt":"2026-06-14T08:03:14","slug":"ncaa-president-charlie-baker-blasts-tristan-smith-injunction-for-citing-brendan-sorsby-ruling","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/703186\/","title":{"rendered":"NCAA president Charlie Baker blasts Tristan Smith injunction for citing Brendan Sorsby ruling"},"content":{"rendered":"

NCAA president Charlie Baker doubled down on his call for Congressional legislation Saturday after a difficult week in which his organization lost not one but two court battles. In addition to Monday\u2019s controversial ruling<\/a> reversing the NCAA\u2019s eligibility ban against Texas Tech<\/a> quarterback Brendan Sorsby<\/a>, Clemson<\/a> receiver Tristan Smith<\/a> was granted an injunction Friday<\/a> that made him eligible to play in 2026.<\/p>\n

In a post on X\/Twitter, Baker specifically pointed to language in Smith\u2019s ruling Friday that directly cited the Sorsby v. NCAA case in its decision to award the veteran Tigers WR a fifth season of eligibility. For Baker, it\u2019s just the latest example of why the NCAA needs immediate antitrust relief with the passage of the bipartisan Protect College Sports Act that is currently working its way through the Senate.<\/p>\n

[ $19.99 gets you a FULL year of On3 | Rivals national coverage ]<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cThe Sorsby decision was never about only one student-athlete,\u201d Baker\u2019s X\/Twitter post Saturday began<\/a>. \u201cWe are already seeing downhill effects in other eligibility cases in which state courts are allowing student-athletes to circumvent longstanding eligibility rules, citing Sorsby outcome as part of the court\u2019s precedent. <\/p>\n

\u201cAnother example of why we need Congress to pass the Protect College Sports Act, authorizing the association to apply common sense eligibility rules consistently for all student-athletes and schools, regardless of the state or local court system.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Sorsby decision was never about only one student-athlete. We are already seeing downhill effects in other eligibility cases in which state courts are allowing student-athletes to circumvent longstanding eligibility rules, citing Sorsby outcome as part of the court\u2019s\u2026 pic.twitter.com\/RVIbFPRB3P<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Charlie Baker (@CharlieBakerMA) June 13, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n

Smith\u2019s attorney, Darren Heitner, shot back at Baker\u2019s post with his own Saturday afternoon, highlighting inconsistencies in how the NCAA has ruled on past eligibility claims. That includes denying Smith\u2019s request for a fifth season of eligibility in January despite previously granting a blanket waiver for players with past JUCO experience following last year\u2019s Diego Pavia v. NCAA injunction ruling<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cState courts are not \u2018allowing student-athletes to circumvent longstanding eligibility rules.\u2019 They are holding the NCAA accountable to its own rules, which the NCAA has and continues to arbitrarily enforce,\u201d Heitner wrote Saturday on X\/Twitter<\/a>. \u201cThe solution is simple. Stop selectively enforcing rules. The NCAA gave JUCO players in Diego Pavia<\/a>\u2018s graduating class an extra year of eligibility. It needs to do the same for all former JUCO players. Otherwise, it\u2019s an arbitrary exception for one class of athletes without any foundation whatsoever.\u201d<\/p>\n

Pickens County (S.C.) District Court judge Jessica Salvini\u2018s temporary injunction ruling for Smith specifically referenced the Sorsby decision Monday<\/a> in Lubbock, Texas, that rescinded the NCAA\u2019s decision to rule the Texas Tech QB permanently ineligible after years of admitted gambling activities, including betting on his own team while a member of the Indiana<\/a> football program in 2022.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs the district court found in the most recent decision issued on June 8, 2026, in the matter of Sorsby vs. NCAA,\u201d Salvini\u2019s ruling read<\/a>, \u201cthe irreparable harm includes, but is not limited to, benefits from the coaching staff, trainers and being a member of a Division I college; and being able to make an informed decision as to whether to enter the 2026 NFL Supplemental Draft.\u201d<\/p>\n

Retired Texas state district court judge Ken Curry ruled Sorsby properly \u201cdemonstrated that he will suffer a probable, imminent, and irreparable injury if this court does not issue this temporary injunction because he will be unable to participate as a member of Texas Tech University\u2019s 2026 football team.\u201d Curry\u2019s ruling also levied several strict conditions Sorsby must adhere to maintain the injunction. That includes serving a two-game suspension to open the 2026 college football season, as well as continuing his ongoing rehabilitation work related to his clinically diagnosed gambling addiction.<\/p>\n