tl;dr in 2 quotes from the decision. Wild shit that the NCAA got this far
> The NCAA does not contest that its re-straints affect interstate trade and commerce and are thus subject to the Sherman Act.
> With this much agreed it is unclear exactly what the NCAA seeks. To the extent it means to propose a sort of judicially ordained immunity from the terms of the Sherman Act for its restraints of trade—that we should overlook its restrictions because they happen to fall at the intersection of higher education, sports, and money—we cannot agree.
> The NCAA does not contest that its re-straints affect interstate trade and commerce and are thus subject to the Sherman Act.
> With this much agreed it is unclear exactly what the NCAA seeks. To the extent it means to propose a sort of judicially ordained immunity from the terms of the Sherman Act for its restraints of trade—that we should overlook its restrictions because they happen to fall at the intersection of higher education, sports, and money—we cannot agree.