Explain a “preliminary injunction hearing”

Ole miss blue print

An injunction is basically a court order to do or not do something. The hearing is to determine if the preliminary injunction should be lifted, or made permanent.

I'm no lawyer, but basically each side gets to present an argument on how their side would be harmed if the temporary restraining order is or isn't extended until a final hearing is held. The court system is slow, it could be a year or two before the actual hearing is held. I think the judge also takes into account the probability of each side winning.

The players will argue that if the TRO isn't extended they will lose the 5th year of eligibility that the deserve and lose NIL money that they can never recover due to the shelf life of an athlete. The NCAA will probably argue that some teams will receive a competitive advantage that they don't deserve, harming other schools.

If the judge thinks it's a 50 50 case, the players have a better argument. If the judge thinks the NCAA has a 75% chance of winning at the end, no injunction.

It helps prevent a TRO from a frivolous lawsuit harming the defendant. Think of it as a 5 minute process to get a TRO, an hour process to get an injunction and many hours or days for a final ruling.

quote:

---

The court system is slow, it could be a year or two before the actual hearing is held

---

I like your description the best. This part is all we want when it boils down to it if we are gonna universally fall in behind Kiffin, even if fundamentally against the entire mess as i am. At that point, who cares if we can't be punished retroactively. Ill take any perceived advantage we can get if it helps us win. Same thinking OM has regarding Chambliss. They dont care if his case loses next year. Get the preliminary injunction ensuring we can't be held responsible later and push it up to the next phase, next year, when it is essentially moot.

If it bothers you that much quit watching. Truth is, the moment it became legal to pay players CFB of “old” was dead.

You can either quit watching or enjoy the sport for what it is now. Or, you can continue to do what you’re doing and you are free to do that.

IMHO, it must be miserable to let a sport get to you that much though.

quote:

---

Imagine being on the 10 side of a 90/10 issue and being proud of it. Pathetic.

---

Yes, you are. You obviously aren't very smart, or you would see that these "adults" you are referring to had NO CHOICE but to try and make a team because they were out of eligibility. The rules changed after the fact, and they would have likely made a different decision had the rule changes been made timely. It isn't hard at all to understand. Yet, here you are, describing yourself to a T in your 90/10 issue. You are the 10.

Can someone explain how a state court has jurisdiction or authority to tell an organization how it vets participants? Is it because it operates within that state?

quote:

---

but they already granted the injunction i thought? is this one against the sec or ncaa? if its against the ncaa is this just an update on the original ruling or something?

---

They didn’t grant an injunction, they granted a TRO. The TRO is a temporary restraining order and it only lasts for 14 days. The injunction hearing is held within those 14 days to determine whether or not an injunction is granted. If it is granted it lasts until the trial, whenever that might be.

This TRO names, the NCAA, the SEC, and Greg Sankey himself as defendants. It names, the plaintiffs as the players, institutions or any coach that the players decide to play for. So the players, schools, and coaches are protected from any penalties that the NCAA or SEC try to impose. Now granted this is just the temporary restraining order, but hopefully the injunction will extend that.