NCAA Threatens "Rule of Restitution" Against Memphis in Cortez Braham Case

Former Tigers receiver Cortez Braham is preparing for the 2026 NFL Draft as the legal battle continues.

Feb. 17, 2026 at 4:39pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The NCAA is seeking to continue its legal battle against former Memphis football player Cortez Braham, even as he prepares for the 2026 NFL Draft. Braham's lawyers had filed a motion to dismiss the NCAA's appeal of a preliminary injunction after the 2025 season.

Why it matters

This case highlights the ongoing tension between student-athletes, universities, and the NCAA over eligibility rules and the organization's enforcement powers. The outcome could set a precedent for how the NCAA handles similar cases in the future.

The details

The NCAA is pursuing what it calls the "rule of restitution" against Memphis, which would require the university to forfeit games and potentially face other penalties if Braham is found ineligible. This comes after Braham's lawyers filed a motion to dismiss the NCAA's appeal of a preliminary injunction that allowed him to continue playing after the 2025 season.

  • Braham's lawyers filed a motion to dismiss the NCAA's appeal after the 2025 season.
  • Braham is preparing for the 2026 NFL Draft.

The players

Cortez Braham

A former football receiver for the University of Memphis who is preparing for the 2026 NFL Draft.

NCAA

The National Collegiate Athletic Association, the governing body for college sports in the United States.

University of Memphis

The university that Cortez Braham played for, and which the NCAA is threatening with the "rule of restitution."

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“I feel like it hasn't really hit me on that aspect,”

— Cortez Braham

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on whether to dismiss the NCAA's appeal, which could determine if Braham is able to continue playing or if Memphis faces penalties.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing power struggle between student-athletes, universities, and the NCAA over eligibility rules and enforcement. The outcome could set a precedent for how the NCAA handles similar cases in the future, with implications for the rights of college athletes.