The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit granted the NCAA’s stay request on Friday in Wisne v. NCAA, a class-action lawsuit challenging the association’s age-based eligibility rule. That rule ran out the clock on Class of 2022 athletes this past spring, ending their college careers under the NCAA’s current framework.
What the stay actually does
The 10th Circuit’s order freezes a preliminary injunction issued by a lower court, which would have granted affected athletes a fifth season of eligibility for the upcoming 2026-27 college sports year. With the stay in place, those athletes will not receive the extra year while the broader appeal plays out.
The ruling does not decide the underlying merits of Wisne v. NCAA. Instead, it signals that the appellate court believes the NCAA has a fair shot at ultimately winning the case — or at least that the lower court’s injunction went too far, too fast. Stays are typically granted when the moving party demonstrates a likelihood of success on appeal and that it would suffer irreparable harm without the pause.
Why the Class of 2022 faced an eligibility cliff
The dispute stems from the NCAA’s age-based eligibility rule, which set a hard ceiling on how long athletes can compete at the collegiate level. For members of the high school Class of 2022, that clock effectively expired this spring — cutting short careers for athletes who had used redshirt years, transferred, or dealt with injuries during the COVID-19 disruption period.
Plaintiffs in Wisne v. NCAA argued that the age limit arbitrarily penalized a cohort already squeezed by pandemic-era scheduling chaos. The lower court’s preliminary injunction agreed, opening the door to a fifth season. The 10th Circuit has now slammed that door shut, at least temporarily.
What Happens Next
The case now moves toward a full appellate review, where the 10th Circuit will weigh whether the NCAA’s age-based eligibility rule violates antitrust or other federal protections. A ruling on the merits could take months, meaning Class of 2022 athletes are unlikely to see relief in time for the 2026-27 season.
Athletes who had been banking on the extra year now face roster decisions, scholarship implications, and potential career endings. Coaches and compliance staff across Division I programs will need to adjust depth charts and financial aid plans without the cushion of an additional season. Meanwhile, the NCAA will treat the 10th Circuit’s stay as validation of its eligibility framework — and likely cite it in the wave of athlete-rights litigation still working through federal courts.
— James Okafor, sports desk, AXO News