Sports Law Test Questions: Antitrust, NCAA, and Athletic Regulation
Posted on Dec 2, 2025 in Law & Jurisprudence
Chapter 11: Professional Sports and Antitrust Law
True or False Questions
- Section 1 of the Sherman Act prohibits concerted action that unreasonably restrains trade in a relevant market. TRUE
- Predatory or exclusionary conduct designed to enable an organization to acquire or maintain monopoly power in a relevant market is permitted under the free trade exception to Section 2 of the Sherman Act. FALSE
- The law of private associations enables a court to review the actions of a private association when it has allegedly violated its own rules or when it has acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner that violates procedural fairness. TRUE
- Exclusive contracts for facility leases may violate antitrust law if they run afoul of the essential facility doctrine. TRUE
- Professional athletes who compete in individual sports are protected by the labor laws in the same manner as team sport athletes playing in professional sports leagues. FALSE
- When a professional tennis players association requires event producers to agree to ceilings on player compensation in order to get their event sanctioned, a court might find this to be illegal price-fixing under antitrust law. TRUE
- Courts usually grant substantial deference to sports governing bodies’ decisions regarding regulation of acceptable equipment. TRUE
- If Accu-disc is the only company that produces flying discs that work well for playing “Frisbee Golf,” they will establish a natural monopoly that automatically violates Section 2 of the Sherman Act. FALSE
- Some players associations have successfully negotiated for disciplinary actions rendered by the league commissioner to be subject to arbitration review. TRUE
Multiple Choice Questions
- The purpose of antitrust law is to:
- a. Promote monopolies
- b. Protect free market capitalism
- c. Regulate labor unions
- d. Limit consumer choice
- The test that courts use when balancing the economically procompetitive effects of a rule against its economically anticompetitive effects is known as:
- a. Rule of reason analysis
- b. Per se rule
- c. Strict scrutiny
- d. Rational basis review
- The constitution and bylaws of a professional sports league typically authorize the league commissioner to engage in disciplinary decision making in which of the following areas?
- a. Approval of player contracts and rule making
- b. Setting player salaries
- c. Negotiating collective bargaining agreements
- d. Managing team finances
- Examples of league-wide rules that have been challenged under the antitrust laws include rules concerning:
- a. Criteria for team ownership and cross-ownership bans
- b. Franchise relocation
- c. Restrictions on the supply of players through use of a reserve clause
- d. All of the above
- Producers of professional individual sports events often must share control with the players association or organized tour regarding such issues as:
- a. Event rules and scheduling
- b. Eligibility of participants
- c. Facility maintenance
- d. Both a and b
- Evidence of attempted monopolization by a motocross promoter might include such actions as:
- a. Leveraging exclusive stadium contracts to exclude its rival
- b. Offering lower ticket prices
- c. Improving safety standards
- d. Hiring better athletes
- Most professional individual sport governing bodies have rules that prohibit the use of equipment that would:
- a. Confer an unfair advantage
- b. Present safety concerns
- c. Be too expensive
- d. a and b only
- NBA Commissioner Stern’s decision to suspend Ron Artest for brawling was made pursuant to his authority to:
- a. Enforce criminal law
- b. Act in the best interests of the game
- c. Arbitrate player disputes
- d. Negotiate endorsements
- Ownership of more than one professional sports franchise is:
- a. Illegal under the Sherman Act
- b. Called cross-ownership
- c. Regulated by the NLRB
- d. Only permitted in minor leagues
Chapter 13: Regulation of Amateur Athletics
True or False Questions
- Authority to govern interscholastic athletics within a state is typically granted to the state high school athletics association by the state legislature or by judicial decision. TRUE
- The courts have traditionally not viewed high school athletics associations as state actors for purposes of deciding constitutional rights claims. TRUE
- Courts typically defer to educational institutions’ decisions regarding academic issues unless the decision was arbitrary and capricious or a violation of the institution’s own policies. TRUE
- The courts currently consider the NCAA to be a state actor for purposes of deciding constitutional rights claims. FALSE
- The NCAA’s bylaws allow member universities to refrain from fully disclosing information sought during a rules infraction investigation until the matter can be heard in a court of law. FALSE
- In Bloom v. NCAA, the court found that the NCAA had been arbitrary and capricious in denying Bloom’s request for a waiver of its rules prohibiting student-athletes from accepting endorsement money. FALSE
- Several courts have ruled that the antitrust laws apply to the NCAA’s commercial activities but not to its promulgation of eligibility rules. TRUE
- When the NCAA entered into television contracts designed to limit the number of college football games that would be televised, and then threatened disciplinary action against any member universities that sought more television exposure, the Supreme Court held that the NCAA’s television plan did not constitute an output limitation that would violate antitrust law. TRUE
- Failure to meet the NCAA’s Academic Progress Rate minimum requirements could result in a university losing some athletic scholarships or being excluded from post-season play. TRUE
- The constitution of an intercollegiate athletics conference is considered to be an enforceable contract between the conference and its member universities. TRUE
- Recently, a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that in some contexts the NCAA could be considered a state actor, despite the earlier Supreme Court decision in the Tarkanian case. TRUE
Multiple Choice Questions
- The responsibility for implementing and enforcing regulations governing high school athletics participation of member high schools is possessed by which of the following?
- a. State legislature
- b. Local school boards
- c. State high school athletics association
- d. NFHS
- In Brentwood Academy, the district court ruled that the high school athletics association failed to provide due process to the school by:
- a. Not presenting its evidence of a rule violation in the presence of the accused so the athletes could have a chance to respond
- b. Failing to provide written notice
- c. Refusing to allow legal counsel
- d. Imposing excessive fines
- Which of the following is the organization that promulgates the playing rules for the various high school sports, which have been adopted by most state high school athletics associations?
- a. National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS)
- b. NCAA
- c. AAU
- d. USOC
- In the Tarkanian case, the Supreme Court reasoned that the NCAA did not control intercollegiate athletics because of:
- a. The NCAA’s principle of institutional control
- b. Federal legislation
- c. State court injunctions
- d. The Commerce Clause
- Which of the following is an example of an internally imposed limit on the NCAA’s authority to regulate intercollegiate athletics?
- a. Rules enforcement process
- b. Principle of institutional control of athletics
- c. Both a & b
- d. Antitrust law
- External constraints on the NCAA’s authority to regulate intercollegiate athletics include:
- a. The Board of Directors
- b. The NFHS
- c. The Committee on Infractions
- d. None of the above
- For purposes of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the NCAA has been held to be which of the following?
- a. A place of public accommodation
- b. A governmental entity
- c. A private club
- d. A labor organization
- In Law v. NCAA, the court used the Rule of Reason analysis to find that the NCAA’s restricted earnings coach salary cap was:
- a. Horizontal price-fixing that violated antitrust law
- b. A legitimate procompetitive measure
- c. Protected by the labor exemption
- d. Subject to the per se rule
