World
Kessler Says DOJ Critiques of House Settlement Are Off Base
The Justice Department’s statement of interest criticizing the NCAA’s preliminarily approved settlement to resolve the House, Carter and Hubbard antitrust litigations is off the mark, attorney Jeffrey Kessler told Sportico in a phone interview on Saturday.
The DOJ’s court filing was made in a California federal district court late Friday. Among other critiques, the DOJ objects to colleges paying athletes 22% of a defined formula for averaged shared revenue. The DOJ finds this arrangement inadequate because the “cap” has not been collectively bargained with a union (there is no union for college athletes since they are not employees and unions consist only of employees).
The cap, the DOJ highlights, means D-1 schools won’t be able to compete for college athletes by offering them “additional value beyond that limit for use of their [NIL].” The DOJ finds it problematic that an NCAA member school “is not permitted to spend what it wants … to compete for the services of college athletes.” While the new amount (around $21 million a year for a school’s athletes) is dramatically greater than the old amount ($0), it is “still fixed by agreement” among competing businesses. Price fixing by competitors is generally disfavored under antitrust law.
The DOJ is also worried that the NCAA and power conferences can use the settlement, which is set to last 10 years, as a defense in future antitrust cases. As the DOJ sees it, the NCAA might “attempt to use a private, negotiated settlement as a shield in future litigation.” To corroborate that concern, the DOJ references an email from NCAA and power conferences attorney Rakesh Kilaru sent to DOJ attorneys in which Kilaru noted his clients “retain all rights” to rely on the settlement.
Kessler, a partner at Winston & Strawn and a lead attorney in several historic sports litigations, stressed the settlement, if granted final approval by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken following a hearing on April 7, will lead to college players being paid “billions of dollars.” He also underscored the settlement will change longstanding NCAA rules that have denied players any compensation.
A settlement is also just that—a settlement—meaning it reflects the give-and-take of a deal. Both sides, including the NCAA, need to find the prospect of settling better than continuing to litigate. The players and the NCAA (and power conferences) could have kept litigating and rolled the dice. They would have also had to accept spending many years in court since federal appeals in antitrust cases can last a long time. They instead opted to cut a deal. Wilken is not charged with determining if the settlement is ideal or optimal for the players. She must assess if it satisfies a lower bar: The settlement must be fair, reasonable and adequate for class members and adequately resolve the alleged antitrust problems.
As to the possibility of the settlement being used as a defense, Kessler emphasized “there is no release of antitrust claims,” either by the Justice Department—which is not a party to the litigation—or future players.
If elite athletes who are currently 12 years old wish to challenge NCAA rules on antitrust grounds in five years, the athletes can do so. The settlement doesn’t release future claims. The two sides expect the 12-year-olds won’t bring a lawsuit and will instead accept the compensation figures that have been set in the House settlement, but if the 12-year-olds want to sue, they can.
The NCAA can use the settlement as a legal defense, but a defense is only as persuasive as found by a court. A defense is not an antitrust immunity or exemption. It’s also not as if the House settlement has dissuaded the filing of antitrust lawsuits. Since Wilken granted preliminary approval last October, Vanderbilt QB Diego Pavia has challenged NCAA eligibility restrictions on JUCO transfers on antitrust grounds and Southern Mississippi basketball player John Wade III has challenged the NCAA’s five-year eligibility period on antitrust grounds.
The timing of the DOJ’s filing is important for at least a few reasons.
First, the filing was made with less than three days to go before President-elect Donald Trump is sworn in as the 47th president of the United States. Trump, his nominee for U.S. attorney general, Pam Bondi, and incoming attorneys for the DOJ’s antitrust division might not agree with the DOJ’s position as expressed in Friday’s statement and could withdraw or amend the statement.
Trump’s DOJ, including its antitrust division, will also take months to fill out. The U.S. Senate must confirm Trump’s nominee for the assistant AG of the antitrust division (Gail Slater) and positions in that department will gradually be filled. Time is of the essence: Wilken is set to decide on final approval after a hearing 11 weeks from now. Trump’s DOJ might not be ready to express a viewpoint by then. This could create an uncertain landscape for Wilken to know the DOJ’s position, which could make the DOJ’s filing on Friday seem less authoritative.
Second, the timing of the DOJ’s statement could deflate its legal arguments. The DOJ could have raised these same points last year, including before Wilken granted preliminary approval in October, but waited until the final hours of the Biden administration. Those points were also already raised by seven former and current D-I athletes in their court filing last October, which might have been a better time for the DOJ to weigh in. Rushing to file the statement before Trump takes office could be interpreted as the DOJ, under the leadership of President Joe Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland, believing Trump and Bondi hold different views.
Lastly, it’s telling that while the DOJ opines the House settlement doesn’t do enough for college athletes because of underlying antitrust concerns, the DOJ hasn’t sued the NCAA over those concerns. The DOJ, while under the leadership of Democratic and Republican presidents, could have challenged these rules at various points over the last 70 years. In fairness to the current DOJ, it did join a lawsuit (Ohio v. NCAA) last year over NCAA transfer rules. And in 1998, the DOJ sued the NCAA under the Americans with Disabilities Act over treatment of college athletes with learning disabilities. But the DOJ could have, and didn’t, challenge numerous other NCAA rules in recent decades as the same college athletes at “big time” programs generated massive revenues for their schools and weren’t paid.
World
Hyun Bin, Jung Woo-sung Crime Thriller ‘Made in Korea’ Sets Disney+ Debut
Hyun Bin and Jung Woo-sung go head-to-head in “Made in Korea,” a 1970s crime noir that launches Dec. 24 on Disney+ with a two-episode premiere.
The series stars Hyun Bin (“Crash Landing on You,” “Confidential Assignment”) as Baek Kitae, an ambitious KCIA agent in 1970s South Korea who leads a dangerous double life. By day, he works as a government operative, while by night he runs an illegal operation, using his underworld connections to consolidate power, protect his brother and generate substantial revenue for the agency.
Jung Woo-sung (“Tell Me That You Love Me,” “12.12: The Day”) co-stars as Jang Geonyoung, an incorruptible prosecutor determined to bring Kitae down. Woo Dohwan (“Bloodhounds,” “Mr. Plankton”) plays Kitae’s brother Baek Kihyun.
The series is written by Park Eunkyo (“Mother,” “A Normal Family,” “The Silent Sea”) and Park Joonseok (“A Normal Family”), directed by Woo Minho (“The Man Standing Next,” “Inside Men,” “Harbin”), and produced by Hive Media Corp (“Inside Men,” “The Man Standing Next,” “12.12: The Day”).
Following the two-episode premiere, “Made in Korea” will release two additional episodes on Dec. 31, with the final two episodes rolling out weekly through Jan. 14. The series has already been renewed for a second season, which is currently in production.
The thriller joins Disney+’s expanding slate of Korean drama content that launched in 2025, including “Unmasked,” “Nine Puzzles,” “Hyper Knife,” “Low Life,” “The Murky Stream” and “Tempest.”
The streamer has additional Korean series slated for 2026, including “Gold Land” starring Park Boyoung, “Perfect Crown” starring IU and Byeon Wooseok, and the return of “A Shop for Killers” for a second season with Lee Dongwook and Kim Hyejun.
World
Pope Leo XIV says he’s ‘very disappointed’ after Illinois approves assisted suicide law
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker meets with Pope Leo XIV
Illinois Democratic Gov. Jay Robert “JB” Pritzker met with His Holiness Pope Leo XIV, a fellow native of the Land of Lincoln, at the Vatican this week. (Credit: REUTERS — No use Fox Weather/Outkick)
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Pope Leo XIV said Tuesday he was “very disappointed” after his home state of Illinois approved a law allowing medically assisted suicide.
Leo, who grew up in Chicago, said he had spoken “explicitly” with Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker while the legislation was on his desk and urged him not to sign the bill into law, saying the measure undermines respect for human life from “the very beginning to the very end.”
“Unfortunately, for different reasons, he decided to sign that bill,” Leo told reporters outside Rome. “I am very disappointed about that.”
The Medical Aid in Dying Act, also referred to as “Deb’s Law,” was signed into law by Pritzker on Dec. 12 and allows eligible terminally ill adult patients to obtain life-ending medication after consultation with their doctors.
NY GOV. HOCHUL TO SIGN BILL TO LEGALIZE PHYSICIAN-ASSISTED SUICIDE: ‘WHO AM I TO DENY YOU?’
Pope Leo XIV met with Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker during an audience at the Apostolic Palace on Nov. 19 in Vatican City, Vatican. (Simone Risoluti – Vatican Media via Vatican Pool/Getty Images)
The measure was named after Deb Robertson, a lifelong Illinois resident with a rare terminal illness who had pushed for the bill’s approval.
The law takes effect in September 2026, giving participating healthcare providers and the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) time to implement required processes and protections.
Leo said Chicago Cardinal Blase Cupich also urged Pritzker not to sign the bill, but his efforts were unsuccessful.
BISHOPS, CATHOLIC GROUPS SLAM CARDINAL CUPICH’S PLAN TO HONOR PRO-ABORTION SEN DICK DURBIN: ‘GREAT SCANDAL’
Pope Leo XIV said he was very disappointed” that Illinois passed a law allowing medically assisted suicide. (Alberto Pizzoli/AFP via Getty Images)
“I would invite all people, especially in these Christmas days, to reflect upon the nature of human life, the goodness of human life,” Leo said. “God became human like us to show us what it means really to live human life, and I hope and pray that the respect for life will once again grow in all moments of human existence, from conception to natural death.”
The state’s six Catholic dioceses have also criticized Pritzker’s decision to sign the bill, saying it puts Illinois “on a dangerous and heartbreaking path.”
Illinois joins a growing list of states allowing medically assisted suicide. Eleven other states and the District of Columbia allow medically assisted suicide, according to the advocacy group, Death with Dignity, and seven other states are considering allowing it.
After signing the bill, Pritzker said the legislation would allow patients with terminal illnesses to “avoid unnecessary pain and suffering at the end of their lives,” and said it would be “thoughtfully implemented” to guide physicians and patients through deeply personal decisions.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker signed the Medical Aid in Dying Act on Dec. 12, allowing eligible terminally ill adult patients to obtain life-ending medication after consultation with their doctors. (Jacek Boczarski/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Fox News Digital has reached out to Pritzker’s office for comment.
Fox News Digital’s Alexandra Koch and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
World
Europeans show solidarity with Denmark after Trump’s Greenland threat
Published on
Exactly one year after Donald Trump first announced his intention to integrate Greenland into US territory on grounds of “national protection”, he’s back for more.
The US president has appointed Governor of Louisiana, Jeff Landry, as the new US special envoy for Greenland with the stated objective of “integrating Greenland into the United States” and repeated the US needs the territory for its national security.
His comments have been taken seriously by EU heads of state and government, who are presenting a united front against what they describe as American expansionist ambitions towards the autonomous territory, which is part of the Kingdom of Denmark.
France’s President Emmanuel Macron and his Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, Jean-Noël Barrot, both responded to the announcement by reaffirming their support for the integrity of Denmark’s territory.
“Greenland belongs to its people. Denmark stands as its guarantor. I join my voice to that of Europeans in expressing our full solidarity.”
On Tuesday, Trump told reporters the United States “needs Greenland for national security, not for minerals or oil, but national security. And if you take a look at Greenland, there are Russian and Chinese ships all over the place. So, we need this for protection.”
He also chastised Denmark for what he described neglecting the territory, “they have spent no money, they have no military protection, they say Denmark arrived there 300 years ago with boats – we were there with boats too, I’m sure. We’ll have to work it all out.”
Adding to the European voices pushing back on the US ambitions and the criticism of Denmark, Commission Ursula von der Leyen insisted that “territorial integrity and sovereignty are fundamental principles of international law”. Despite the tone coming out of Washington, she appeared to refer to the US as an ally in arctic security.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez echoed those remarks. “Respecting sovereignty and territorial integrity is central to the EU and to all nations of the world,” he wrote on X. “Security in the Arctic is a priority in which we seek to work with allies and partners.”
The US and Denmark are part of NATO, which is supposed to ensure mutual defence in the event of aggression against one of its members. That principle has never been tested by conflict between members of the alliance if one were to seize territory from another.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte has so far remained silent on the issue. During a press conference with Trump in the White House’s Oval Office in March, he also chose not to comment after a question from a journalist.
“When it comes to Greenland, if it joins the US or not, I will leave that outside of me in this discussion because I don’t want to drag NATO into that,” he said.
-
Iowa1 week agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Maine1 week agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland1 week agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
New Mexico1 week agoFamily clarifies why they believe missing New Mexico man is dead
-
South Dakota1 week agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
Detroit, MI1 week ago‘Love being a pedo’: Metro Detroit doctor, attorney, therapist accused in web of child porn chats
-
Health1 week ago‘Aggressive’ new flu variant sweeps globe as doctors warn of severe symptoms
-
Maine1 week agoFamily in Maine host food pantry for deer | Hand Off