The highest court in the state of Pennsylvania has ruled that the NCAA will have to go to trial for the legality of their sanctions against the Penn State football program.
According to the Associated Press, the college sports' governing body saw its bid to avoid a trial in January denied Wednesday. Justice Max Baer wrote in a separate ruling that Commonwealth Court Judge Anne Covey did not exceed her legal jurisdiction in the 2012 consent decree.
The NCAA fined Penn State $60 million for attempting to cover up Jerry Sandusky's child molestation crimes. The historic sanctions also included a four-year bowl ban and the loss of scholarships, both of which have been dropped. However, the $60 million fine and all of the late Joe Paterno's vacated wins remain untouched.
The NCAA also saw its internal emails discussing the sanctions, among the most severe they have ever issued, and ultimately revealed that officials questioned them. A Pennsylvania state senator filed a lawsuit against the NCAA Sunday with seven emails, dated between July 13 and July 21, 2012, as evidence. The sanctions were announced July 23, 2012.
"Delicate issue, but how did PSU gain a competitive advantage by what happened?" Kevin Lennon, NCAA vice president for academic and membership affairs, wrote in one email, according to ESPN. "Even if discovered, reported, and actions taken immediately by the administration, not sure how this would have changed anything from a competitive advantage perspective."
In the two-plus years since the sanctions were filed, Penn State has permanent replacements at president, athletic director, head football coach and more prominent posts.
"We find it deeply disturbing that NCAA officials in leadership positions would consider bluffing one of their member institutions, Penn State, to accept sanctions outside of their normal investigative and enforcement process," the school said in a statement. "We are considering our options. It is important to understand, however, that Penn State is in the midst of a number of legal and civil cases associated with these matters. We therefore have no additional comment."
The NCAA defended the emails in their own statement.
"Debate and thorough consideration is central in any organization, and that clearly is reflected in the selectively released emails. The national office staff routinely provides information and counsel to the membership on tough issues," the NCAA wrote. "The NCAA carefully examined its authority and responsibility to act in response to the athletics department's role detailed in the Freeh report. Ultimately, advised by all information gathered the Executive Committee determined to act and move forward with the Consent Decree."
