A federal judge in Colorado has granted a preliminary injunction requiring the NCAA to allow athletes from the high school class of 2022 an additional, fifth year of eligibility. This ruling comes amid a class action lawsuit, Wisne et al v. NCAA, which challenged the NCAA’s new age-based eligibility policy enacted in June 2026. That policy granted five years to complete five seasons but excluded athletes who had already used four years of eligibility, effectively barring a fifth season for many 2022 graduates. The case argued that denying this extra year would cause players to lose valuable name, image, and likeness (NIL) opportunities and other educational benefits.

The injunction, issued by Judge Charlotte Sweeney, could affect tens of thousands of athletes who believed their college sports careers were over. It contrasts with other ongoing state-level lawsuits restricting relief only to their plaintiffs. However, legal uncertainties remain, including whether the NCAA will appeal the decision, as the organization has said it intends to challenge eligibility lawsuits individually. The ruling does not explicitly block the NCAA’s so-called "rule of restitution," which could potentially penalize players and schools if the policy is later overturned.

The decision also complicates roster and transfer dynamics. Some athletes who have already pursued professional careers or started the draft process must now reconsider their options. Additionally, questions persist about how players seeking to transfer teams under these revised eligibility terms navigate NCAA transfer windows, a dilemma not clearly resolved by the federal ruling or prior state rulings. This creates potential operational challenges for colleges handling extended eligibility for former athletes.

NCAA president Charlie Baker reiterated the organization’s support for the Protect College Sports Act, a legislative effort aimed at standardizing rules nationwide and curtailing ongoing legal battles. Plaintiffs’ legal representatives suggested the NCAA’s initial exclusion of 2022 athletes might have been a strategic move to highlight the need for congressional intervention. This ruling presents a major setback to NCAA’s eligibility reforms, intended to stem lawsuits but instead sparking additional legal confrontations and uncertainty across college sports.