Every paradigm-shifting change to college athletics in the past decade-plus has started in California.
The landmark O'Bannon v NCAA lawsuit, filed in 2009 by former UCLA basketball player Ed O'Bannon, was heard in the summer of 2014 by the US District Court in Northern California. The first state law allowing college athletes to profit off their name, image and likeness was signed in 2019 by California governor Gavin Newsom. The ongoing House v NCAA lawsuit, whose settlement is expected any day now and will allow schools to share revenue directly with athletes, is being ruled upon by the same judge and the same court as O'Bannon.
Now, a new lawsuit, filed in California, is attempting to do for high school sports what the above lawsuits and bills did for college athletics.
As reported by Front Office Sports, former California high school athlete Dominik Calhoun has filed a class-action lawsuit against the California Interscholastic Federation, arguing the organization's rules around NIL are a violation of antitrust law.
Crucially, California is one of the states that already allows its high school athletes to participate in the NIL market. In 2022, Bronny James and JuJu Watkins -- classmates at Sierra Canyon High School at the time -- signed publicity deals with Nike. However, CIF rules forbid high schools from sharing revenue directly with athletes (as will happen in the NCAA soon, brought forth by House) and also prevents booster clubs from forming collectives to recruit and retain athletes, as happens currently in college athletics.
“Collectively, these rules and regulations forbid CIF member schools or CIF Sections from sharing the revenue they receive by licensing their student-athletes’ NIL with those very student-athletes, artificially fixing the price student-athletes are compensated for their NIL at zero,” the complaint read.
Calhoun played football and ran track at Pittsburg High School, near Oakland. A 3-star recruit, he is now preparing to begin his freshman season as a defensive back at Boise State.
But, Calhoun's complaint argues, CIF rules illegally barred him from participating in the economic value that his efforts generated for Pittsburg High School and the CIF.
“This case challenges rules that unfairly prevent high school athletes in California from being compensated for their hard work and the use of their name, image, and likeness—even as others profit from them,” Yaman Salahi, co-lead attorney representing Calhoun, told FOS. “It’s the logical next step after the reforms inaugurated by successful antitrust litigation on the collegiate level. Corporations see a lot of untapped economic value in high school athletics, and we want to ensure that value is shared equitably with the athletes that create it.”
Of course, suing to change rules in college athletics was worthwhile because there was a verifiable pot of gold on the other end of the rainbow. College athletics is a multi-billion dollar business. High school athletics is...well, I personally don't know what it is. Most every high school program fundraises because the budget provided by the school would not make ends meet. The vast, vast majority of high school athletes have zero market for their services, either on the open NIL market or via collectives. The vast majority of principals would probably tell you over a frosty beverage they'd sooner stop sponsoring athletics than cut checks to their athletes as pseudo-employees.
And yet, many of the same statements could have been said about college athletics in recent years, and within a month's time dozens of schools who do not turn a profit on paper will cut checks to athletes whom the vast majority of their own fans could not identify out of uniform.
So, I do not know where Calhoun's lawsuit will go, if it goes anywhere at all. But I do know that if, five years from now, the national economic landscape of high school athletics is irrevocably changed, history tells us that change will have started in California.