OXFORD — The battle for Ole Miss quarterback Trinidad Chambliss to return for the 2026 season continues as the NCAA has filed an appeal against the preliminary injunction granted to him. This legal action was confirmed by documents acquired by the Clarion Ledger on March 5.
The NCAA is seeking an interlocutory review from the Mississippi State Supreme Court regarding a decision made under Judge Robert Whitwell in the Mississippi Chancery Court on February 12. The appeal is represented by NCAA attorneys J Douglas Minor, Taylor Askew, and David Zeitlin, all of whom were present during the initial trial.
In the 18-page petition filed on March 5, the NCAA argues that Chambliss has exhausted his eligibility for NCAA Division I football due to the expiration of his five-year window to complete four seasons of competition—known as the “Five-Year Rule.” The petition claims that allowing Chambliss to play again would unfairly disadvantage other NCAA member institutions who adhere to eligibility rules.
The NCAA’s filing emphasizes the potential harm to competition, saying, “Under the trial court’s order, UM will enjoy the benefit of rostering a star quarterback who is no longer eligible to compete.” The organization expresses concern over the implications for other Division I teams who might face Ole Miss in the upcoming 2026-2027 season.
Furthermore, the NCAA is requesting an expedited review of the case, arguing that a delay could prevent timely resolution before the Rebels’ first game of the season, which is scheduled for September 6 against Louisville. The current injunction allowing Chambliss to participate remains in place while the appeal is pending.
Tom Mars, who represents Chambliss in this case, expressed skepticism regarding the NCAA’s chances of success in their appeal. He referenced the precedent set by the 2021 Alston v. NCAA case, where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the NCAA regarding limitations on education-related compensation. Mars expressed confidence that the outcome would favor Chambliss, drawing on the NCAA’s previous legal struggles.
This ongoing legal situation not only affects Chambliss but could have broader implications for how eligibility rules are enforced in collegiate athletics. As this case unfolds, both sides await decisions that could reshape the competitive landscape in NCAA football.