The Big 12 voluntarily dismissed its June 14 federal lawsuit against Texas Tech University and Attorney General Ken Paxton on Friday.
Natali Wyson, an attorney for the Big 12 Conference, filed a voluntary dismissal, which in this case does not need a judge’s permission. The lawsuit is also dismissed “with prejudice” – meaning the same lawsuit cannot be refiled in the future.
A brief statement from the Big 12 for LubbockLights.com indicated things have calmed down since then.
“The Big 12 Conference and Texas Tech have resolved this matter internally. We are moving ahead together as a Conference, 16 strong,” a spokesperson for the conference said.
Among other things, the Big 12’s lawsuit accused Paxton of falsely invoking antitrust laws in his legal representation of Tech related to the recruitment of player Brendan Sorsby. (TTU is a state institution and as such Paxton’s office provides legal counsel.)
In the days leading up to the Big 12 lawsuit, Thomas York, a lawyer in Paxton’s office, sent a letter threatening the Big 12 with legal action for antitrust violations, breach of contract and tortious interference.
York’s letter said, “The total exposure – for both the Big 12 and its members, joint and severally – will be substantially more than $200 million.”
Three days later, the Big 12 sued in federal court in Dallas.
How it started
The original dust up started with the Red Raiders’ recruitment of quarterback Brendan Sorsby. Sorsby has since withdrawn plans to play for Tech, dropped his NCAA lawsuit, and he was also rejected by the NFL’s supplemental 2026 draft. He stated a few months ago that he hopes to enter the regular 2027 NFL Draft.
It was discovered after Sorsby’s commitment to Texas Tech that he admitted placing bets on college football while he was a player with both Indiana and Cincinnati. In some cases, Sorsby admitted after-the-fact he was betting on his own team – although not while on the active roster to play. But he also claimed the NCAA action against him was unjust because he was entitled to rehabilitation for a gambling addiction rather than simply ending his college playing career.
LubbockLights.com covered the ruling by Curry here.
The NCAA issued a permanent ban on his eligibility after his move to Texas Tech.
Sorsby sued in state district court. Ken Curry, a visiting judge from Fort Worth, ruled in favor of Sorsby and issued a temporary injunction against the NCAA – theoretically allowing Sorsby to play.
The Big 12 was not a party to the state lawsuit – and not under the court’s order like the NCAA was.
The Big 12 looked into possibly enforcing its own rules – specifically against Tech for allowing Sorsby to play (which ultimately did not happen).
“Member Institutions began raising questions about whether the Conference could vote on potential sanctions against TTU,” the Big 12 lawsuit said.
Paxton, on Tech’s behalf, worked to prevent the Big 12 from exercising its rights under its own bylaws or punish the conference for enforcing the rules, according to the federal lawsuit.
This was also, as the Big 12 claimed, a violation of constitutional rights.
Paxton’s threatened legal action would force Big 12 schools to “condone, if not tacitly endorse, the sports gambling of one of its players.”
Many paragraphs of the Big 12 lawsuit explained why the conference is sensitive to the issue of sports gambling.
Texas Tech never answered the suit
Texas Tech never filed its side of the story in court records in the Big 12 lawsuit. However, in several public statements, Tech said it was doing the right thing to help a player recover from a gambling addiction.
LubbockLights.com reached out to spokespersons for Texas Tech athletics but did not get a response.
Regardless of Curry’s injunction, Tech decided in June it would not permit Sorsby to play during the 2026 season. That was the reason Sorsby’s legal team cited in the dismissal of his NCAA lawsuit.
