Jeffrey Beall
Audio By Carbonatix
Keep Dallas Observer Free
We’re aiming to raise $10,000 by April 26. Your support ensures Dallas Observer can continue watching out for you and our community. No paywall. Always accessible. Daily online and weekly in print.
An SMU women’s tennis player is suing the NCAA in a case challenging the status quo of collegiate tennis eligibility rules.
On April 1, attorneys representing SMU athlete Gina Feistel filed a request for injunctive relief against the NCAA in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in Dallas. Her attorneys allege Feistel was wrongly deemed ineligible for collegiate competition under a tennis-specific rule protecting amateurism, they say, has been rendered “obsolete” by the growth of name, image and likeness payments and the House v. NCAA revenue-sharing settlement, according to the filing.
Feistel has competed in five matches for the Women’s Tennis Association, the highest international level of women’s tennis, finishing with a 4-1 record and over $8,000 in prize money, according to her WTA biography. She has also professionally competed in the International Tennis Federation, a lower level of professional competition than the WTA.
Under the NCAA’s “20-year rule,” players lose eligibility following their 20th birthday for each year they participate in professional tennis competition before enrolling at their certifying institution. There are exemptions for athletes playing in professional matches deemed necessary to earn ranking points required for selection to their respective national team, and Feistel’s attorneys say her professional activity following her 20th birthday was approved by the Polish Tennis Association.
According to the filing, Feistel’s eligibility was challenged after winning singles matches against Arizona and Baylor on Jan. 31 and Feb. 1, respectively. She previously enrolled at Belmont University on a scholarship in 2022 and competed on the women’s tennis team before transferring to SMU, although documents do not clarify when she enrolled. Between competing for Belmont and SMU, Feistel completed community courses and studied at a university in Poland while traveling for competitions.
In 2024, between her time at Belmont and SMU, Feistel rose as high as No. 149 in the WTA Singles Rankings.
The filing alleges the NCAA is capriciously applying the 20-year rule to unreasonably restrict competition in the collegiate tennis labor market by not granting Feistel an exemption. That’s right: labor market. Her attorneys are arguing that college athletics have moved away from amateur competition with the advent of name, image and likeness payments in 2021 and the House v. NCAA ruling, which allows institutions to pay athletes directly.
Amateurs No More?
As the NIL era wears on, similar cases testing NCAA eligibility and prize money requirements are emerging as more professional athletes enter now-lucrative college competition. While he eventually dropped the lawsuit, Alabama basketball player Charles Bediako recently sued the NCAA for similar injunctive relief after his eligibility was revoked following his enrollment with prior professional experience.
In women’s tennis, University of North Carolina star Reese Brantmeier has filed a lawsuit challenging the NCAA’s $10,000 cap on prize money won by athletes in WTA and ITF competitions. A finalized settlement in Brantheimer’s favor is expected later this month, overturning the cap and creating a $2 million fund for athletes affected by the rule in previous years, according to previous reporting by The Athletic.
In an email, a spokesperson for SMU said that university officials are “aware of Gina Feistel’s decision to pursue legal action regarding her eligibility” and “will continue to support Gina as a student-athlete while respecting the legal process.” No further comment was provided on the lawsuit.
Feistel’s attorneys, Jon Velie and Kurt Elieson, did not return a request for comment.
They are seeking an injunction and a temporary restraining order against the NCAA to have her reinstated to the SMU women’s team. They are also seeking damages, with the filing alleging that the NCAA ruling has “tortiously interfere[d] with the plaintiff’s economic relations, including rankings, seedings, scholarship benefits, NIL opportunities and postseason participation.”
The filing also states that the NCAA’s decision not to grant an exemption is “causing immediate and irreparable harm to Feistel’s ability to play in collegiate athletics, with her eligibility window closing in fall 2026.
On Tuesday, District Court Judge Keren Scholar set a preliminary hearing date on the injunction case for May 1, according to court filings. Feistel’s attorneys have demanded a jury trial.
