The U.S. Supreme Court case, National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston (2020), involved a challenge to the NCAA's restrictions on education-related benefits for student-athletes. The plaintiffs, led by former West Virginia football player Shawne Alston, argued that these limitations violated federal antitrust laws designed to promote competition and prevent monopolies. They contended that colleges should be able to offer any education-related benefits they choose in order to compete for athletes' talents without interference from the NCAA’s rules limiting such compensation. In response, the NCAA maintained its regulations were necessary to preserve amateurism in college sports and differentiate them from professional leagues. However, both lower courts sided with Alston and his co-plaintiffs ruling against the NCAA's limits on certain types of compensation related directly or indirectly towards educational purposes like scholarships for graduate school or payments for tutoring. Ultimately, this landmark decision affirmed by unanimous vote at Supreme Court level significantly challenged long-standing practices within collegiate athletics regarding athlete compensation.

In the case of NCAA v. Alston, there was no dissenting opinion as the decision by the Supreme Court was unanimous (9-0) in favor of Alston. The court ruled that the NCAA's restrictions on education-related benefits for student-athletes violated antitrust laws. This ruling allows colleges to offer their student athletes unlimited compensation as long as it is connected to their education.