The NCAA likely would drop the most serious charges against the University of Tennessee if a federal judge grants a preliminary injunction on Feb. 13 to freeze the association’s name, image and likeness rules.

But even if the injunction is denied, Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said UT would have legal grounds to ask the courts to strike down NCAA penalties related to NIL.

“Obviously, if the judge enjoins (the injunction), then (the NCAA) can’t do it,” Skrmetti told Knox News when asked if the NCAA investigation would continue. “But whether or not we get the preliminary injunction, I’d hope that’s not the sole factor that is considered looking at these rules.”

Skrmetti said an injunction would declaw the NCAA in enforcing the very NIL rules it alleges that UT broke. But Judge Clifton Corker’s opinion when he denied a temporary restraining order already strengthened UT’s position against potential NCAA sanctions.

“Considering the evidence currently before the court, plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim under the Sherman Act (antitrust),” Corker wrote.

That statement and others supplied UT with reasonable grounds to sue the NCAA if it levied harsh penalties for breaking NIL rules, which Corker described as likely violating antitrust law.

One legal argument against the NCAA's ability to sanction schools for infractions related to NIL is such action would violate UT’s right to due process if the NIL rules were interpreted as violating antitrust law and were retroactively enforced.

By the same principle, a lawsuit could be filed by an NIL collective or athlete harmed by NCAA sanctions.

All that hangs in the balance as the state of Tennessee and UT face off with the NCAA on different fronts.

On Jan. 30, the NCAA investigation came to light. It alleges that UT broke rules involving NIL benefits for athletes.

The NCAA has not taken the critical step of issuing UT a notice of allegations. So there’s room for the investigation to heat up or cool down, but the temperature likely depends on the injunction decision.

On Jan. 31, the states of Tennessee and Virginia filed an antitrust lawsuit to stop what it calls the NCAA’s “NIL-recruiting ban.” Skrmetti said news of the NCAA investigation signaled him it was time to sue.

The suit and the NCAA investigation aren’t directly connected. But the judgment in the prior will impact the latter.

Will Tennessee get the injunction to halt NCAA rules?

Corker will consider the preliminary injunction at a hearing in the Eastern Tennessee District of federal court in Greeneville. He denied a restraining order on Feb. 6 that would’ve paused the NCAA’s NIL rules until the hearing.

Skrmetti said winning the injunction hearing will be a challenge, so UT fans shouldn’t pin their hopes solely on that order to fend off the NCAA probe.

“It is possible to get a preliminary injunction after you don’t get a (temporary restraining order), but it’s probably more common that if you don’t get the (temporary restraining order), you don’t get the preliminary injunction," said Skrmetti.

“So we’ll see what the court does. Obviously, we requested the (temporary restraining order), and I was very happy with the court’s opinion based on its analysis of the merits. And so we’re going to continue pushing.”

Will NCAA relent or press forward if NIL rules survive hearing?

The NCAA has a plausible shot to win the injunction hearing.

If the injunction is denied, NIL rules would remain until the lawsuit concludes. That could take months to adjudicate and even years in the appeals process.

Surviving two preliminary legal challenges – a restraining order and an injunction – could embolden the NCAA to continue its investigation into UT.

But Skrmetti said the NCAA could be walking on shaky ground, based on what the judge has already said in the case.

“If a federal judge says these rules are probably illegal, I’ve got to think that people will at least stop and consider whether they were on the right track if they were trying to enforce those rules,” Skrmetti said.

In his judgment rejecting the restraining order, Corker wrote the “NCAA’s NIL-recruiting ban likely harms competition” and therefore is “anticompetitive.” Furthermore, he said the rules in question “likely foster economic exploitation of student-athletes.”

And Corker indicated that the NCAA faces an uphill battle to win the case, either in the injunction or the final judgment months later, and specifically against charges that its NIL rules violate antitrust laws.

Attorney general: ‘Harsh discipline’ doesn’t fix NCAA errors

The NCAA has not issued a notice of allegations, but UT knows generally what it faces if the investigation reaches the next stage.

On Jan. 29, UT Chancellor Donde Plowman sent a scathing letter to NCAA President Charlie Baker, which Knox News obtained via an open records request Jan. 30. In it, she referenced the possibility UT could face the serious charge of lack of institutional control in this latest investigation.

That could trigger a postseason ban in football. UT avoided that penalty in the Jeremy Pruitt recruiting scandal, which the NCAA decided in July, perhaps in part to Skrmetti’s threat to sue the NCAA.

Skrmetti suggested this latest NCAA investigation may be “payback” because the NCAA enforcement staff failed to secure a postseason ban against the Vols in the investigation of the former football coach and his staff.

He also believes the ambiguity and ever-changing nature of the NCAA’s NIL rules led to UT’s current case and his lawsuit.

“Everybody on all sides acknowledges that things are very chaotic and in flux right now,” Skrmetti said. “… Harsh discipline and enforcement is never the way to bring clarity when people don’t know what the ground rules are.”

Tennessee, NCAA could battle over due process for Nico Iamaleava

Whether the injunction is granted or denied, Skrmetti believes UT has a strong defense against the NCAA on grounds of due process. The rules in question may not have been in place when UT allegedly tested them.

“Any sort of retroactive enforcement that violates fundamental principles of due process in American law – and I realize we’re not talking about the American legal system when we talk about the (NCAA) disciplinary process,” Skrmetti said, “but I would really hope that the strength of the reaction here indicates that just how off base the whole state thinks these rules are.”

The NCAA is investigating allegations that UT broke NIL rules in multiple sports, including football. And individual players could be in the NCAA’s crosshairs, including quarterback Nico Iamaleava over alleged recruiting inducements, Knox News has learned.

DID NICO IAMALEAVA BREAK NIL RULES? A full timeline of quarterback in regards to NCAA probe

The New York Times reported that Spyre Sports Group, an NIL collective representing UT athletes, facilitated a private jet for Iamaleava to fly to Knoxville while UT was recruiting him.

If the NCAA classified Spyre or the person who provided the plane as a booster, that would be a violation. Spyre denied that allegation in a statement from attorney Tom Mars.

The NCAA referenced the NIL rule in question in a statement while not implicating a specific player or incident.

“Our membership has steadfastly supported the prohibition on impermissible recruiting contacts, booster involvement in recruiting prospects and the use of NIL offers as recruiting inducements,” the NCAA said.

If Iamaleava took those flights, was he flying as a client of Spyre or as a UT football recruit?

Whether the flight was a violation might depend on when it occurred, who paid for it and whether any permissible contractual agreement with a collective was in place.

The date of the alleged flight has not been reported.

On March 11, 2022, Iamaleava signed an $8 million NIL deal with Spyre, The Athletic reported. Ten days later, Iamaleava committed to Tennessee.

On May 9, 2022, the NCAA amended its policy, reinforcing to member schools that using NIL benefits as recruiting inducements violates its rules. And it planned to retroactively investigate “improper behavior” and NIL collectives involved in recruiting players over the previous 10 months.

'PAYBACK' FROM NCAA? Attorney general suspects motive behind NCAA investigation into Tennessee

Again, the state of Tennessee’s lawsuit and the NCAA investigation into UT aren’t the same case. But their arguments are aligned.

“The (lawsuit) isn’t brought up on behalf of UT. It’s brought up on behalf of all the student-athletes in Tennessee because all of them are affected,” Skrmetti said. “But obviously once enforcement starts, that has an outsized effect on the student-athletes that are directly impacted by it.”

Adam Sparks is the Tennessee football beat reporter. Email adam.sparks@knoxnews.com. X, formerly known as Twitter@AdamSparks. Support strong local journalism by subscribing at knoxnews.com/subscribe.

Get the latest news and insight on SEC football by subscribing to the SEC Unfiltered newsletter, delivered straight to your inbox.

This article originally appeared on Knoxville News Sentinel: How NCAA investigation changes if Tennessee wins, loses in federal court