The preliminary injunction hearing was scheduled for yesterday . I can't find anything about it in the media . Anyone know what happened ?

According to Grok:

Hudson v. NCAA is a Dallas County state-court case (Judge Martin Hoffman) filed by Cowboys WR Jordan Hudson and roughly 40 other Class-of-2022 athletes. They challenge the NCAA's June 2026 "five-for-five" eligibility model because it was not applied retroactively to players who already used four seasons in 202226. The SEC and Commissioner Greg Sankey were also named after Power conferences adopted extra bans on former pros.

Latest known procedural status

Aug. 27, 2026: Hoffman granted a 14-day TRO. It blocked the NCAA, SEC, and Sankey from using Bylaw 12.6, four-season limits, transfer-portal timing, or prior pro-roster time to keep the plaintiffs out of 202627 Division I competition. The order's stated goal was to put them "in the position they were in at the end of their last college sports season."

A preliminary-injunction hearing was set for Sept. 11. As of the evening of Sept. 12, 2026, there is no widely published written PI order or news report confirming the outcome of that hearing. The original TRO would have lapsed around Sept. 10 without an extension or conversion to a longer injunction.

This is one piece of a much larger national patchwork: a Colorado class-wide injunction in Wisne was stayed by the 10th Circuit; other athletes have won (or lost) individual TROs/PIs in Louisiana, Kentucky, Ohio, West Virginia, Arkansas, and elsewhere. Results vary by court.

Rylan Griffen specifically

Griffen is a named plaintiff in the Hudson group. He is a 2022 high-school class player (Alabama Kansas Texas A&M), used four seasons, went undrafted in 2026, and played NBA Summer League with Denver without a guaranteed NBA contract. That last point is important: he is not in the same "signed NFL/WNBA roster" category as Hudson.

After the TRO:

Court papers said that if granted another year he "intends to remain at Texas A&M University for the 2026-27 season."

TexAgs / local reporting said he enrolled in classes at A&M for the fall semester.

A&M was described as "exploring all options." A later social post (Sept. 5) claimed A&M is paying him to play this fall; that is unofficial and not confirmed by the program.

Bottom line on Griffen: The Aug. 27 TRO put him in a playable legal position and he has taken the academic step of enrolling. His ability to compete for the Aggies in 202627 still depends on (1) whether Hoffman extended or converted that TRO after the Sept. 11 hearing, and (2) whether A&M actually puts him on the roster and is willing to absorb any conference/NCAA risk. Basketball season has not started, so there is more time than there was for football players.

If you need a court-document-level update after the Sept. 11 hearing, Dallas County civil dockets are the source of truth; national sports sites have not yet published a clear post-hearing ruling.

Thanks. That's what i was looking for. I couldn't find that anywhere with queries on ChatGPT.

Maybe I'm missing it, but it doesn't look like Griffen is still a plaintiff in that case.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gx5n0qkjEjcbh4pq6HcypA4A9O-Lk1oh/view

I wonder why that would be the case?

Luke had hinted that Rylan's team might be changing directions to try and find a case more likely to succeed than that one but I don't know any of the details.

I remember reading on TexAgs that the Dallas case didn't really fit his situation so maybe Rylan attached himself to a case more like Popes California case that focuses on his exact 5in5 situation?

Ok. Thanks for updates guys!

HorseCripplers70 said:

---

I remember reading on TexAgs that the Dallas case didn't really fit his situation so maybe Rylan attached himself to a case more like Popes California case that focuses on his exact 5in5 situation?

---

That's true. But the weird thing is that this case actually does better fit his case now. They got rid of the SEC as a defendant, and they also got rid of the "former pros" so this case really just became a 5 in 5 case. But maybe Griffen's team had already pivoted prior to those things happening. Who knows.

chap said:

---

HorseCripplers70 said:

---

I remember reading on TexAgs that the Dallas case didn't really fit his situation so maybe Rylan attached himself to a case more like Popes California case that focuses on his exact 5in5 situation?

---

That's true. But the weird thing is that this case actually does better fit his case now. They got rid of the SEC as a defendant, and they also got rid of the "former pros" so this case really just became a 5 in 5 case. But maybe Griffen's team had already pivoted prior to those things happening. Who knows.

---

Also remember reading what you just posted about that case changing on TexAgs too and the post insinuated Rylan was still on it so very interesting he's not. If he's not, wouldn't that mean he's no longer covered by the TRO and should not be eligible again?

I need a "green" post from Luke, suspense about Rylan's situation is killing me.

BREAKING:

Rylan Griffen has been granted a TRO in Brazos County 👍

Griffen was previously in the Dallas County case, but is now pivoting to a case closer to A&M.

I’ve got the exclusive scoop on why (Premium): https://t.co/2e8duYACzd pic.twitter.com/s8DWe0oqsj

— Luke Evangelist (@lukeevangelist_) September 14, 2026

Thanks!

So someone explain the difference between this case and the LSU football case.

Serious question. I haven't followed it that closely.

Thanks

The NCAA and SEC don't seem to have as big of a problem with players that played in the NBA summer league as they do players that were in NFL camps.

It seems to me functionally the act of signing a contract with a professional team (in the US) may be the litmus test for the SEC basketball cases . Warren did and played in G league play . RJ Luis did . Griffen declared for draft , wasn't drafted , didn't sign a contract ( or so it seems) , participated in NBA Summer league . As I understand it the only compensation for NBA summer league is per diem for maybe housing and meals altho that might be incorrect .

Seems to me the primary difference between some of these different cases is was a contract signed or not but I guess we'll see how a judge may interpret it.

RJ Luis hasn't played in a regular season NBA game, just for the record.

Thanks for correction . Edited out.

I think RJ Luis is toast, but they do have two players that are in somewhat similar situations to Jordan Pope in Dent and Clark.

I still think there's a decent shot they field a good team, albeit an EXTREMELY thin one.

If he ends up playing, what can we expect from him.

Has he been working out?
What kind of shape is he in?
How will he fit with this team?

He does know the system, which is a plus.

It disturbs me that it seems like some part of this year's season will be determined by which teams were lucky and unlucky based on judicial and jurisdictional technicalities

Such is NCAA athletics in 2026.