On Tuesday, BYU center Jaxon Kohler and other athletes were granted a preliminary injunction by a California court. The NCAA is expected to appeal the ruling and will almost certainly try to pause it while the appeal plays out.
The court case involves 76 players, with the majority from the 2022 recruiting class, who are challenging the NCAA’s five-year eligibility model.
What the ruling means
The ruling means that Kohler remains eligible to play for the Cougars as he pursues a fifth season of college basketball.
Back in August, Kohler and the others in the case won a temporary restraining order. That allowed him to enter the transfer portal and land at BYU. Tuesday’s injunction replaces that short-term protection with a longer one. Kohler will stay eligible until at least a final trial. No trial date has been set at this point.
For now, the ruling in Glancey v. NCAA gives Kohler eligibility through the end of the 2026-27 season. While this is not a final victory, it's an encouraging sign for his path to eligibility for the season. Looking ahead, he will only lose eligibility if the NCAA is able to pause the ruling or reverse the California order.
If the NCAA appeals but is unable to pause the ruling, that would be great news for Kohler. He would be able to continue playing for BYU, and his case for eligibility would be stronger since he’d be playing in real games for the Cougars leading up to a trial date.
How other cases have played out
The results across the country have been mixed, and they show why an NCAA appeal matters.
In Ohio, an appeals court overturned an injunction for 24 basketball players seeking a fifth year. The court unanimously ruled that the plaintiffs couldn’t be grandfathered into the new model.
Meanwhile, in Indiana, the appeals court denied the NCAA’s emergency motion to pause an injunction covering dozens of players. The Indiana Supreme Court rejected an NCAA attempt to bypass the appeals court. The trial judge granted an injunction that runs through the case’s December 14 trial date. Kohler’s California lawyers also represent players in the Indiana case, which is notable.
In New York, the case remains pending. Players, including Kansas’ Melvin Council Jr., were granted an injunction, and the NCAA appealed the ruling last Thursday.
Kohler’s path forward
If the NCAA asks the court to pause the ruling and the court denies that stay, as Indiana’s did, Kohler will be able to play until at least the final trial date. If the court grants the stay or reverses on appeal, as Ohio’s did, then he would become ineligible and his future would be very uncertain until at least a trial.
It’s difficult to know which direction things will go, but getting an injunction from the California court is a big step for Kohler toward eligibility.
There are a few things going in Kohler’s favor. Preliminary injunctions are harder to overturn than restraining orders, he is covered by a state order that the Tenth Circuit doesn’t affect, and a lengthy trial timeline could keep the case alive deep into, or even past, the season.
On the other hand, appeals courts have often sided with the NCAA on deference and roster disruption arguments.
For now, Kohler remains eligible. He’s already played once for BYU, in an exhibition against Nebraska, and Cougar fans will hope he will suit up for all of the program's remaining games this upcoming season.
Add us as a preferred source on Google