NCAA president Charlie Baker says Brendan Sorsby ruling has had 'downhill effects'
NCAAF College Football News, Photos, Stats, Scores, Schedule & Videos...
The reaction to a Texas judge granting Texas Tech quarterback Brendan Sorsby an injunction against the NCAA on Monday, June 8 has been swift and widespread, with leaders across the college sports world expressing dismay about the potential ramifications stemming from it.
One of the consequences from it has now caught the eye of perhaps the most powerful person in college athletics.
In a post on social media on Saturday, June 13, NCAA president Charlie Baker said there have been “downhill effects” of Judge Ken Curry’s decision in Sorsby’s case, with Baker providing a screenshot of a South Carolina court ruling that granted Clemson wide receiver Tristan Smith’s request for an injunction against the NCAA.
In the portion of the court’s decision that Baker provided, the district court decision from Sorsby’s case was cited, noting that had he not been eligible to compete for Texas Tech this season, he could have suffered “irreparable harm,” including missing out on the “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.”
Baker wrote that the Sorsby decision “was never about only one student-athlete.”
“Another 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,” Baker said.
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’s… pic.twitter.com/RVIbFPRB3P
— Charlie Baker (@CharlieBakerMA) June 13, 2026
Smith had sued the NCAA on Jan. 21 for an additional year of eligibility after college sports’ governing body denied his request for a waiver last November. Smith had spent two seasons at Hutchinson (Kansas) Community College in 2022 and 2023. The NCAA provided a blanket eligibility waiver for the 2025-26 academic year to any athletes who started their careers at the junior-college level and whose careers would have otherwise ended, but that did not apply to the 2026-27 academic year. Smith argued that the NCAA “selectively granted eligibility waivers to other similarly situated athletes.”
Under South Carolina law, a temporary restraining order and injunction are appropriate when the plaintiff will suffer immediate and irreparable harm absent relief; the plaintiff is likely to
succeed on the merits; and no adequate remedy at law exists.
Despite Baker’s assertion, the consequences of the Texas district court’s ruling could be limited.
As legal analyst Michael McCann noted, Curry’s decision was a non-final order and has no precedent outside of Lubbock County, Texas. In the order granting Smith’s injunction request, Judge Jessica Ann Salvini wrote that situations like Smith’s should be determined on a “case-by-case basis.”
“Under these specific facts and circumstances, granting a temporary restraining order and injunction ensures a just result,” Salvini wrote.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY Sports: NCAA president Charlie Baker: Brendan Sorsby ruling has had ‘downhill effects’
More at NCAAF College Football News, Photos, Stats, Scores, Schedule & Videos