CalMatters, the nonprofit news organization, has filed a lawsuit against UC Berkeley demanding the release of financial records showing how much the university is paying its student athletes through name, image and likeness deals — marking the second such legal action against a UC campus in as many months.
The petition, submitted last week in Alameda County Superior Court, closely mirrors a lawsuit CalMatters filed against UCLA in August. Both cases stem from the campuses’ refusal to disclose payment details following a landmark national legal settlement last year that, for the first time, allows colleges across the country to pay their athletes directly.
UC Berkeley spokesperson Janet Gilmore said in an email Sunday that the university is reviewing the complaint and declined further comment.
The stakes are considerable. Direct payments to college athletes have become one of the most powerful recruiting tools available to universities, and the amount of money flowing into these deals has surged. The commission overseeing NIL compensation nationally cleared more than $227 million in payments during July and August alone — nearly double what was reported during the same period a year earlier. Under current rules, schools are permitted to direct up to $20.5 million toward athlete compensation. At UC Berkeley, Chancellor Richard Lyons said last year that the funding pool draws from athletics revenue, donor contributions and some campus dollars.
CalMatters argues in its filing that Berkeley “has not produced records sufficient to show how those public funds are being distributed.” The lawsuit contends that California taxpayers have a right to know which athletes are being paid, how much, and which teams they represent.
The news organization says it spent nearly a year trying to obtain this information from UC Berkeley, submitting multiple requests under the California Public Records Act to universities statewide. Some campuses provided only minimal data, while others released at least partial records — an inconsistency CalMatters says demonstrates that the payment information it is seeking qualifies as public record.
UC Riverside, for instance, disclosed that it distributed roughly $200,000 to its male athletes, including several payments to members of the men’s basketball team, along with $70,000 to female athletes.
The disparity highlighted by that example touches on a broader legal question. A recent Congressional Research Service report noted that the shift toward direct athlete compensation raises new concerns about compliance with federal sex-based equity requirements in collegiate sports.
Meanwhile, most Division I athletic programs nationwide continue to operate at a financial loss, according to federal data. Both UCLA and UC Berkeley reported athletic department deficits for the 2024-25 academic year, relying on endowment funds or general campus budgets to cover the shortfall.
Andy Schwarz, a sports economics expert and partner at the law firm OSKR, argued in an earlier interview that the distinction between public and private funding within university athletics is largely illusory. “Every single dollar that the university allocates is taxpayer money, whether it’s donated or not,” Schwarz said. “It’s like if you have a bathtub and say the money on the right is public and the money on the left is private, but it’s all bathwater, swirling around.”
Original source: CalMatters
