Judge Charlotte Sweeney ordered the NCAA on Friday to issue a blanket waiver that would give affected athletes another year of eligibility, a ruling that immediately puts the league’s new five-and-five rule under pressure. The preliminary injunction is class-wide, which means it is not limited to one player or one team but reaches every athlete who fits the court’s definition.
The order covers all persons in the United States who began playing collegiate sports in the 2022-2023 season, competed in NCAA Division I sports and finished four years of eligibility by the end of the 2025-2026 season. For college football and basketball players, that can matter right away because the ruling is aimed at athletes barred from a fifth season by the NCAA’s immediate enforcement of the new rule, not at some later class of players. The question now is not whether the court has spoken; it has. The question is whether the NCAA will comply and issue the blanket waiver or take the fight to the Tenth Circuit.
The challenge grew out of the NCAA’s decision earlier this month to adopt the five-and-five eligibility rule, which athletes from the 2022 class say should not have been applied to them so quickly. They argue they were supposed to be grandfathered in under the old system and that losing a fifth season also cuts into their ability to make a living through NIL. A number of notable names in college basketball have already filed lawsuits, and one case filed on Friday included more than 50 plaintiffs, showing how quickly the dispute has spread beyond a single program or sport.
Sweeney’s order goes further than a narrow stay. By defining the class broadly and requiring a blanket waiver, she effectively gave the same answer to every affected athlete who met the criteria before the NCAA could sort them out one by one. That leaves the NCAA with a blunt choice: accept a ruling that could open the door for players who had already used four years under the old rule, or ask the Tenth Circuit to reverse it while the next season approaches. For athletes who thought their college careers were over, the timing makes the decision immediate, not theoretical.
The longer the NCAA waits, the more the ruling becomes a live eligibility problem instead of a legal one. If it appeals, the fight shifts to the Tenth Circuit; if it does not, the blanket waiver becomes the practical answer for a wide class of athletes whose final year may no longer be final at all.
