Today’s tourist Op-Ed is from Paul McDonald. In Johnson v. NCAA, Mr. McDonald was named one of the 20 Most Important Black Figures in College Football by Sports Illustrated as one of the co-counsel for the college athletes.
In July, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a magnificent censure of the NCAA for an offensive, race-related discussion made in Johnson v. NCAA, the situation comparing school athletes to other students employed in Job Study-style programs.
The NCAA opposes college sports receiving the same rights and protections as scholar concessions workers, student seating attendants, and student ticket-takers at NCAA events. Since Berger v. NCAA was filed in 2014, the NCAA has supported its claim by citing law to examine college athletes to paid jail workers under the” slavery different” of the 13th Amendment.

But sports media has generally, and atrociously, failed to cover this absurd argument at the time of this writing.
Well, the NCAA referenced the equal” slavery different” discussed in” 13th”, Ava Duvernay’s award-winning Netflix film, in which “scholars, activists and politicians analyze the criminalization of African Americans and the U. S. jail boom”.
To sum up, the 13th Amendment “except as a punishment for crime whereof the party may have been formally convicted” abolished slavery and involuntary slave.
Vanskike v. Peters is the pivotal situation establishing that prisoners, thus, are precluded from reputation as people under national laws.
The NCAA has relied upon Vanskike v. Peters to say that its history of sportsmanship may be given the same legal deference, and constitutional effect, as this” slavery exception”, i. e., that NCAA members have the right to address college athletes like convicted prisoners rather than like other students employed in campus offices, libraries, dining halls, and NCAA venues.
In the Berger case, the Seventh Circuit inexplicably allowed this.
Fast forward to this summer. In its opinion in the Johnson case, at pages 38-9, the Third Circuit strongly rebuked the NCAA’s argument:
We disagree with]the ] comparison of college athletes to prisoners and refuse to equate a prisoner’s involuntary servitude, as authorized by the Thirteenth Amendment, to” the long-standing tradition” of amateurism in college athletics.
But sports media said nothing.
The Third Circuit first expressed its disapproval of the NCAA’s argument during a February 17, 2023, hearing. At the time, The New York Times reported:” Ridiculous” ,]Senior Circuit Court Judge Theodore ] McKee chimed in when the Vanskike case was mentioned …. It was not known whether McKee was hostile toward the legal justifications or offended by the admission that college athletes were prisoners, or perhaps both.

In May 2023, the Rev. The NCAA’s comparison of prison labor by Al Sharpton and NFLPA came out in a joint statement, blaming the sexist claim that the Women’s National Team does not work as hard as the Men’s National Team, and that there were repercussions for those who were right and aware.
But sports media said nothing.
Indeed, sports media immediately, and roundly, condemned the U. S. Soccer Federation, resulting in the resignation of the U. S. Soccer Federation president.
Sports media has also condemned insulting comparisons of athletes to prisoners and slaves, such as the former Houston Texans owner’s use of black players as “inmates running the prison” and the former Texas Tech men’s basketball coach’s Biblical use of slaves as masters during a coaching session.
Each of these circumstances warranted condemnation.
So does the NCAA’s argument “equat]ing ] a prisoner’s involuntary servitude, as authorized by the Thirteenth Amendment, to ‘ the long-standing tradition’ of amateurism in college athletics”.
The NCAA’s argument is offensive to all college athletes.
That said, it is a particular affront to the history, and dignity, of black college athletes, who are over-represented in the highest-revenue sports—football and basketball—and most of whom are descendants of slaves.
The Southeastern Conference ( SEC ), which filed an Amicus Brief in the Third Circuit to support the NCAA’s argument, is held accountable for this at the highest levels of the NCAA. But, as in other aspects of the nation’s life, there is rarely accountability without media informing the public.
Since this is football season, consider this Op-Ed a hand-off to sports media, which, to make its living, relies upon access to black people in college and pro sports.
I implore sports media to run with this story, call this flagrant foul, and respect black history and dignity. For more about Johnson v. NCAA, e. g., how all D1 College Athletes pass the Third Circuit’s employee test, take a listen to this podcast.