Abstract
When the House v. NCAA settlement authorized up to $20.5 million in annual direct revenue-sharing payments to college athletes, it resolved one century-old injustice and quietly created another. For the approximately 15,000 international student-athletes competing on F-1 visas, the same payments that enrich their domestic teammates may constitute unauthorized employment under federal immigration law, threatening deportation and visa revocation. This Note argues that the House settlement has exposed a structural collision between NCAA compensation policy and F-1 immigration doctrine that existing visa categories – the P-1A, the O-1, and various permanent-residency pathways – are individually incapable of resolving. Using Poa v. Jaddou, the first federal challenge to USCIS's denial of P-1A status to an NCAA athlete, as its central case study, this Note proposes four concurrent reform pathways: judicial reinterpretation of the "solely" language in § 1184(c)(4); DHS regulatory guidance; USCIS withdrawal of its categorical P-1A bar; and congressional expansion of the NIL for International Collegiate Athletes Act to cover institutional revenue-sharing.
Recommended Citation
Justiz, Jeff
(2026)
"IMMIGRATION LAW MEETS COLLEGE ATHLETE PAY: HOW U.S. IMMIGRATION LAW EXCLUDES INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE ATHLETES FROM THE COMPENSATION REVOLUTION,"
UNH Sports Law Review: Vol. 5:
Iss.
1, Article 7.
Available at:
https://scholars.unh.edu/unhslr/vol5/iss1/7
Recommended Citation
Justiz, Jeff (2026) "Immigration Law Meets College Athlete Pay: How U.S. Immigration Law Excludes International College Athletes From the Compensation Revoluation," UNH Sports Law Review: Vol.5: Iss.1: Article 1.