Recent lawsuits against the NFL fall into four active fronts: the Sunday Ticket antitrust appeal now before the Ninth Circuit, Brian Flores’s racial discrimination case cleared for trial after the Supreme Court declined to intervene, continuing disputes over the concussion settlement, and a disability-benefits class action in Maryland. In parallel, Congress, the FCC, and the Department of Justice are all examining whether the league’s decades-old antitrust exemption still fits a streaming-era business.
Sunday Ticket Antitrust Appeal
The largest case against the NFL involves Sunday Ticket, the subscription package that has been the only way to watch out-of-market Sunday afternoon games. A class of 2.4 million residential subscribers and 48,000 commercial subscribers who bought the package through DirecTV between 2011 and 2023 sued the league, alleging violations of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act through the exclusive distribution deal and inflated pricing. Plaintiffs argued that the NFL’s exemption under the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 covers over-the-air broadcasts, not pay-TV subscription services, and pointed to other major leagues that distribute out-of-market packages through multiple providers.1NPR. NFL Must Pay Billions in Sunday Ticket Antitrust Case
A jury in the Central District of California found the NFL liable on June 27, 2024, awarding $4.6 billion to the residential class and roughly $97 million to the commercial class. Trebled under federal antitrust law, the total would have exceeded $14 billion.1NPR. NFL Must Pay Billions in Sunday Ticket Antitrust Case
The verdict did not survive long. On August 1, 2024, Judge Philip S. Gutierrez granted the NFL’s motion for judgment as a matter of law and wiped out the award. He ruled that the testimony of plaintiffs’ expert economists Daniel Rascher and John Zona relied on “flawed methodologies” and should have been excluded, and that without their testimony “no reasonable jury could have found class-wide injury or damages.”2NPR. NFL Sunday Ticket Ruling Overturned He also found that the jury had ignored his instructions on calculating damages and improvised its own “overcharge” math using inputs not tied to the trial record.3The New York Times. NFL Sunday Ticket Lawsuit Verdict Overturned
The subscribers appealed. On March 9, 2026, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel of Holly Thomas, Anthony Johnstone, and Senior U.S. District Judge Joan Lefkow heard oral arguments.4Sportico. NFL Sunday Ticket Appeal Ninth Circuit Judge Lefkow called it “remarkable” that the trial court took the case away from the jury, noting that while jury verdicts can be “imprecise,” appellate courts generally accept them when the instructions were valid. Judge Johnstone pressed the NFL on whether college football was a reasonable comparator for the plaintiffs’ expert, asking, “If that’s not a yardstick, what is?”5Courthouse News Service. Ninth Circuit Skeptical of NFL’s Win in Sunday Ticket Trial Judge Thomas was more cautious, questioning whether the Sports Broadcasting Act’s exemption makes any NFL-college football comparison fundamentally flawed. NFL counsel Paul Clement urged deference to the trial judge under an abuse-of-discretion standard; plaintiffs’ attorney Amanda Bonn countered that Gutierrez substituted his own judgment for the jury’s. A decision is expected in 2026, typically within three to four months of argument.
Brian Flores Racial Discrimination Case
Brian Flores filed a class-action lawsuit in February 2022 against the NFL, the Giants, the Broncos, and the Texans after he was fired as head coach of the Miami Dolphins. He alleged systemic racism in the hiring of Black coaches, claimed the Giants gave him a “sham” interview after already settling on another candidate, and alleged retaliation by other teams. Coaches Steve Wilks and Ray Horton later joined as plaintiffs.6NFL.com. Supreme Court Won’t Intervene in Discrimination Suit Led by Brian Flores Against NFL
The NFL tried to push the dispute into its internal arbitration process, where Commissioner Roger Goodell would serve as the default arbitrator. The district court refused, and in August 2025 the Second Circuit unanimously affirmed. Writing for the panel, Judge José A. Cabranes held that the NFL’s framework was “arbitration in name only” because it gave “unilateral substantive and procedural discretion” to the league’s own chief executive, making it “inherently biased.” The Second Circuit denied rehearing en banc on October 6, 2025.7CPR. Flores Can Go to Court as Second Circuit Slams the NFL’s Arbitration Scheme
On May 26, 2026, the Supreme Court declined to hear the NFL’s appeal, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh dissenting.8CNN. NFL Supreme Court Brian Flores The case is cleared to proceed toward trial in New York. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on May 20, 2026, and the NFL and the named teams were scheduled to file motions to dismiss by June 5, 2026.9The New York Times. Brian Flores NFL Discrimination Supreme Court Appeal Plaintiffs’ attorneys David Gottlieb and Douglas Wigdor said in a statement that “the NFL must now accept that its commissioner cannot be the arbitrator over discrimination claims against the league and its teams.”6NFL.com. Supreme Court Won’t Intervene in Discrimination Suit Led by Brian Flores Against NFL Flores is currently defensive coordinator for the Minnesota Vikings.
Concussion Settlement Disputes
The 2017 concussion settlement, which covers 65 years with no cap on total payouts, has paid out more than $1 billion for conditions including ALS, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, and dementia.10The Indiana Lawyer. Two Indy Law Firms Seeking More Than $165K in NFL Concussion Settlement Fees It also remains a source of continuing conflict.
Denials and a Shrinking Doctor Network
According to the Brain Injury Association of America, out of 1,221 claims submitted based on diagnoses from settlement-approved doctors as of early 2025, 343 (28 percent) had been denied, often with the claims administrator attributing cognitive impairment to depression or sleep disorders rather than traumatic brain injury. The network of settlement-approved doctors has shrunk by more than 60 percent since 2018, and reviews can take months or years, with some players dying before a decision.11Brain Injury Association of America. Investigation Shines Light on Large Number of Claim Denials From NFL Concussion Settlement
Race-Norming
Cognitive tests used in the program applied different baseline scores for Black players, assuming lower starting cognitive functioning and making it harder for Black retirees to show the decline needed to qualify. The issue surfaced in a 2020 discrimination suit by former players Najeh Davenport and Kevin Henry.12PBS NewsHour. Judge Approves Plan Between NFL Players to Eliminate Racial Bias in Concussion Settlement In June 2021 the NFL pledged to end the practice and review past claims.13ESPN. NFL to Halt Race-Norming and Review Black Claims in Concussion Settlement On March 4, 2022, Senior U.S. District Judge Anita B. Brody approved a revised race-neutral scoring system requiring the administrator to rescore the tests of several thousand previously denied Black former players. The change was expected to add at least $100 million to the NFL’s settlement costs.
Fraud in the Program
In June 2026, court-appointed special masters confirmed that five law firms had defrauded the settlement fund of more than $95 million through questionable Parkinson’s diagnoses. A December 2025 claims-administrator audit detailed the use of non-approved physicians to manufacture diagnoses. Of the claims submitted by these firms, 57 were approved and paid before detection, 4 were denied or withdrawn, and 37 that remained pending were denied. All five firms were barred from further participation, and special masters indicated the total “may end up being materially higher” as investigations continue.14The New York Times. NFL Concussion Settlement Fraud Parkinson’s Disease
Disability Benefits Class Action
A separate class action, Alford et al v. The NFL Player Disability & Survivor Benefit Plan, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland by 10 former players, alleging the plan wrongfully denies benefits and uses physicians “financially incentivized to deny disability claims.” In March 2024 the court partially granted and partially denied the NFL’s motion to dismiss, dropping claims against individual defendants including Commissioner Goodell but allowing the core denial-of-benefits claims to proceed into discovery.15The New York Times. NFL Disability Plan Lawsuit Class Action
Federal Scrutiny of the Antitrust Exemption
Beyond individual lawsuits, the legal foundation of the NFL’s business model is under review in Washington. The Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 lets the league negotiate television deals collectively rather than team by team. On June 8, 2026, the House Judiciary Committee released a report titled “The Sports Broadcasting Act: A Special-Interest Antitrust Exemption Gone Awry,” accusing the NFL of stretching the exemption well beyond its original purpose.16House Judiciary Committee. New Report: Sports Broadcasting Act: A Special-Interest Antitrust Exemption Gone Awry
The report challenged the NFL’s claim that 87 percent of its games air on broadcast television, noting that the league’s own data showed the average game reaches only 39 percent of U.S. households.16House Judiciary Committee. New Report: Sports Broadcasting Act: A Special-Interest Antitrust Exemption Gone Awry It cited internal data showing more than 70 percent of former Sunday Ticket subscribers signed up to follow a single out-of-market team, and 70 percent who canceled cited cost. The committee alleged the NFL had blocked an ESPN proposal to price Sunday Ticket at around $70 per season and rejected a team-by-team purchase option to keep the bundle price high.17House Judiciary Committee. Scathing House Judiciary Committee Report Accuses NFL of Stretching Laws The report called the NFL’s $110 billion media rights deal a “house of cards built on an overstretched antitrust exemption.” Rep. Scott Fitzgerald, chair of the House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee, said lawmakers “have an obligation to reconsider whether that exemption remains justified,” and a hearing was scheduled for June 10, 2026.18Deadline. NFL Antitrust Exemption House Hearing
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has separately questioned whether the exemption applies to streaming deals at all, noting that the 1961 law was written for “sponsored telecasts” on free broadcast TV. Carr warned there is a “point at which you sort of tip the scale” by putting too many games behind a paywall, which could cause “the whole exemption to collapse.”19Fox News. FCC Chairman Questions NFL’s Antitrust Protection as League Shifts to Streaming Services The FCC opened a public comment period in 2026 to examine how the shift to streaming affects consumers.20New York Post. FCC’s Carr Says NFL Could Lose Antitrust Protections for Shifting Games to Streaming The Department of Justice has reportedly opened its own antitrust investigation into the NFL’s use of the broadcast exemption.21The National Desk. DOJ Reportedly Opens Investigation Into NFL Anticompetitive Tactics