4 ms·
Not by the arguments put forth in that decision. The key bit on the Nevada law is stated in paragraph 21: > By its terms, it regulates only interstate organiz
by vonmoltke 7y ago
Not by the arguments put forth in that decision. The key bit on the Nevada law is stated in paragraph 21:
> By its terms, it regulates only interstate organizations, i.e., national collegiate athletic associations which have member institutions in 40 or more states.
Nevada made the mistake of specifically targeting interstate associations. California does not, so based on the reasoning in that decision the California law does not violate the Commerce Clause per se as the Nevada law did.
- MisterBastahrd 7y agoYou either didn't fully read or don't comprehend what you read. The NCAA engages in interstate commerce. California's bill requires that any organization that does business in California allow players in California to be paid. It is requiring the NCAA to provide a carve-out for California. This is the exact same scenario, legally.