Imagine a high school athlete so talented that they could earn over $100,000 a year—but they’re barred from doing so simply because of where they live. That’s the reality for Jamier Brown, the nation’s top-ranked wide receiver in the class of 2027, who is now at the center of a groundbreaking lawsuit challenging the Ohio High School Athletic Association’s (OHSAA) ban on high school athletes profiting from their name, image, and likeness (NIL). But here’s where it gets controversial: while college athletes across the country are cashing in on NIL deals, high school stars like Brown are left in the dust—unless they leave Ohio. And this is the part most people miss: this isn’t just about money; it’s about fairness, opportunity, and the future of young athletes.
The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in Franklin County Court of Common Pleas by Brown’s mother, Jasmine, argues that the OHSAA’s rules are not only outdated but also unconstitutional. According to the complaint, the ban ‘unlawfully suppresses [athletes’] economic liberties, freedom of expression, and restrains competition in the NIL marketplace.’ It highlights the stark contrast between Ohio and the majority of states, where high school athletes are free to capitalize on their talents. For instance, Brown could be signing trading card deals or leveraging his reputation to build valuable networking connections—opportunities currently off-limits to him.
‘What pushed me was knowing that allowing NIL for high school athletes in Ohio could be a game changer for a lot of kids like me,’ Brown told ESPN. He’s not just thinking about himself; he’s advocating for fairness. The 5-foot-11, 185-pound phenom, committed to Ohio State since November 2024, wants to stay in his home state and compete at the highest level while helping his family. ‘Being able to use NIL would take some weight off my mom and me by helping cover things like tutoring, training, and travel,’ he explained. These are expenses that, for many families, can make or break an athlete’s ability to reach their full potential.
But the lawsuit raises a bold question: Is Ohio inadvertently pushing its top talent to leave? The complaint points out that Ohio is one of just six states that restrict high school NIL profits, incentivizing athletes to relocate to neighboring states like West Virginia, Kentucky, or Pennsylvania. ‘Ohio is home, and I take pride in that, so my focus is staying here and doing my part to help make things better,’ Brown said. His pride in his state is undeniable, but the system, as it stands, doesn’t reward that loyalty.
Luke Fedlam, Brown’s attorney, emphasizes the broader implications: ‘Jamier’s family is similar to a lot of families that recognize there are significant opportunities to elevate their name, image, and likeness.’ This isn’t just about one athlete; it’s about leveling the playing field for all high schoolers in Ohio. The lawsuit calls the OHSAA’s rules ‘outdated and unlawful,’ especially since Ohio has already allowed college athletes to benefit from NIL. Why should high schoolers be left behind?
The debate doesn’t end here. Should high school athletes be treated as professionals, or does monetizing NIL at that level cross a line? Some argue that allowing NIL deals could distract from academics or create unfair advantages. Others, like Brown, believe it’s a matter of fairness and opportunity. What do you think? Should Ohio join the majority of states in allowing high school NIL profits, or is the OHSAA’s ban justified? Let’s hear your thoughts in the comments—this conversation is far from over.
