来源：《美联社新闻》
原文刊登日期：2021年6月21日
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday the NCAA can’t limit education-related benefits — like computers and paid internships — that colleges can offer their sports stars, a victory for athletes that could help open the door to further easing in the decades-old fight over paying student-athletes.
周一，美国最高法院一致裁定，NCAA不能限制大学可以为其体育明星提供的与教育相关的福利，比如电脑和带薪实习。这是运动员们的一次胜利，这可能有助于进一步缓解数十年来围绕学生运动员薪酬问题的斗争。
Schools recruiting top athletes could now offer tens of thousands of dollars in education-related benefits that also include study-abroad programs. However, the case doesn’t decide whether students can simply be paid salaries for the benefits their efforts bring — measured in tens of millions for many universities.
招收顶尖运动员的学校现在可以提供数万美元的教育相关福利，其中还包括留学项目。然而，这一案件并不能决定学生们是否可以因为他们的努力给学校带来的好处而获得工资——对于许多大学来说，运动员能为其创造数以千万计的收入。
The high court agreed with a lower court’s determination that NCAA limits on the education-related benefits that colleges can offer athletes who play Division I basketball and football violate antitrust laws.
最高法院同意下级法院的判决，即NCAA对大学为参加甲级篮球和橄榄球比赛的运动员提供的教育相关福利的限制违反了反垄断法。
Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the court that the NCAA sought “immunity from the normal operation of the antitrust laws,” an argument the court rejected. Gorsuch said that allowing colleges and universities to offer “enhanced education-related benefits ... may encourage scholastic achievement and allow student-athletes a measure of compensation more consistent with the value they bring to their schools.”
大法官尼尔·戈萨奇代表最高法院写道，NCAA寻求“反垄断法正常运作之外的豁免权”，但最高法院驳回了这一论点。戈萨奇说，允许大学提供“增强的教育相关福利……可能会鼓励学生运动员取得学业成就，并让他们的薪酬与他们为学校带来的价值更一致。”
Under current NCAA rules, students cannot be paid, and the scholarship money a college can offer is capped at the cost of attending the school.
在目前的NCAA规定下，学生是不能拿到钱的，而且大学可以提供的奖学金金额以就读学校的费用为上限。
The NCAA had defended its rules as necessary to preserve the amateur nature of college sports, preventing a blurring of the line between them and professional teams, with colleges trying to lure talented athletes by offering over-the-top benefits.
NCAA曾为其规则辩护，认为这是保护大学体育业余性质的必要条件，防止他们与专业队之间的界限模糊，大学试图通过提供过高的福利来吸引有才华的运动员。
As a result of Monday’s ruling, the NCAA itself can’t bar schools from offering Division I basketball and football players additional education-related benefits. But individual athletic conferences can still set limits if they choose.
根据周一的裁决，NCAA本身不能禁止学校为甲级篮球和橄榄球运动员提供额外的教育相关福利。但是，如果单项运动协会愿意，它们仍然可以设定限制。
“It is our hope that this victory in the battle for college athletes’ rights will carry on a wave of justice uplifting further aspects of athlete compensation,” said Steve Berman, an attorney for the former college athletes, in a statement following the ruling. “This is the fair treatment college athletes deserve.”
“我们希望，这场为大学生运动员权利而战的胜利，将掀起一波正义浪潮，进一步提高运动员薪酬，”大学生运动员的律师史蒂夫·伯曼在裁决后的一份声明中说。“这是大学生运动员应得的公平待遇。”
The court’s ruling comes at a time when the NCAA has already been debating how to amend its rules to allow college athletes to profit from their names, images and likenesses, NIL for short. That would allow athletes to earn money for things like sponsorship deals, online endorsement and personal appearances.
最高法院的裁决出台之际，NCAA已经在讨论如何修改规则，允许大学运动员从他们的名字、形象和肖像(合称NIL)中获利。这将使运动员可以通过赞助协议、网上代言和个人亮相来赚钱。
NCAA President Mark Emmert last week urged member schools to pass a long-stagnant names-and-images reform proposal before the end of the month. If they don’t, he will take action himself, he said. On Monday, he told that the high court’s ruling makes going about the NIL reforms “more complicated” but “doesn’t mean we can’t and we shouldn’t.”
NCAA主席马克·埃默特上周敦促会员学校在本月底之前通过一项长期停滞不前的名字和形象改革提案。他说，如果他们不这样做，他自己就会采取行动。周一，他表示，最高法院的裁决使得NIL改革“更加复杂”，但“并不意味着我们不能也不应该改革”。