By Marcela Bermudez, of Greenspoon Marder
On September 19, 2025, U.S. District Court Judge Brian Jackson denied the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services’ (USCIS) motion to dismiss the NIL-visa lawsuit involving former Louisiana State University student and basketball player Last-Tear Poa, who now plays for Arizona State. This decision marks a potential shift in the landscape of immigration law as it pertains to international college athletes in the U.S. In this article, we will explore the potential implications of this ruling for foreign college athletes and the ongoing challenges faced by international students in the realm of Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) payments.
The Court’s Decision
The court’s decision in favor of Ms. Poa challenges the USCIS’s interpretation of P-1A athlete visa eligibility for international college athletes. P-1A classification is reserved for international athletes. USCIS denied Ms. Poa’s petition for P-1A classification, arguing that Ms. Poa did not meet the criteria for this classification.
In its Motion to Dismiss, USCIS argued that Ms. Poa cannot satisfy the eligibility requirements for a P-1A classification because she is not seeking status as an athlete “solely for the purpose of performing as such an athlete” because she is in the U.S. as a full-time student with the objective to earn a degree. Ms. Poa’s counsel responded stating that “solely for the purposes of” under the P-1A classification does not preclude the dual purpose of attending university and participating in college athletics.
The court agreed with the Plaintiff, Ms. Poa, finding that it would be appropriate to determine whether USCIS’s decision was arbitrary and capricious with the benefit of the full administrative record to interpret what is meant by purpose. The case has the potential of leveling the playing field for international college athletes to afford them the same opportunities as their peers who are U.S. college athletes. Since the evolving nature of college athletics and the inception of NIL opportunities in 2021, the USCIS has provided no guidance on how international college athletes can receive compensation from NIL activities.
Current Status of Visas for College Athletes
The ruling has brought renewed attention to the complexities surrounding visa options for international college athletes. Traditionally, these athletes have relied on the F-1 student visa, which allows them to study in the U.S. but imposes strict limitations on employment. The introduction of NIL payments has further complicated this landscape, as athletes seek to capitalize on their personal brand while maintaining their immigration status.
Currently, as F-1 students, college athletes cannot receive compensation without first receiving employment authorization. As a result, they cannot provide US-based services for NIL activities, unless it is a passive activity. However, establishing certain NIL activities in the U.S. are passive is very limited. NIL activities conducted outside of the US are permissible.
The P-1A classification for athletes of international acclaim has been a contentious option for international college athletes. The recent ruling provides some hope that international athletes may qualify for a P-1A classification to pursue both their college athletic activity and continue with their education.
Implications of NIL Payments
The advent of NIL payments has transformed the collegiate sports environment, offering athletes new avenues for financial gain. For international athletes, however, this development has introduced additional legal uncertainties. The F-1 visa’s restrictions on employment have limited these athletes’ ability to engage in NIL activities without jeopardizing their immigration status.
The Court’s decision in the NIL-visa lawsuit may pave the way for a more inclusive interpretation of visa eligibility, allowing international athletes to benefit from NIL opportunities without fear of violating immigration laws. This shift could encourage more international talent to pursue collegiate sports in the U.S., enhancing the diversity and competitiveness of college athletics.
Despite the Court’s favorable ruling, international college athletes continue to face significant challenges and legal uncertainties. The intersection of immigration law and collegiate sports remains a complex and evolving area, with many athletes navigating a labyrinth of regulations to maintain their status.
Conclusion
The recent court ruling in the NIL-visa lawsuit represents a pivotal moment for international college athletes in the U.S. By challenging USCIS’s restrictive interpretation of visa eligibility, the decision opens the door for a more inclusive approach that acknowledges the evolving nature of collegiate sports and NIL opportunities.
