The Big 12 Conference filed a 47-page federal complaint Monday morning in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, naming Texas Tech University, System Chancellor Brandon Creighton, University President Lawrence Schovanec, Athletics Director Kirby Hocutt and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and asking a judge to decide whether Texas Tech may be sanctioned for supporting quarterback Brendan Sorsby’s bid to play in the 2026 season.
In the filing the conference seeks a declaratory judgment and a preliminary injunction that would allow it to enforce its bylaws — and to do so without running afoul of state action — by asking the court to declare that the Big 12 can punish Texas Tech and to block the State of Texas from punishing or threatening the conference for doing so. The complaint also stresses that the litigation concerns NCAA enforcement and does not limit the Big 12’s separate power to sanction a member under its own rules.
The stakes are concrete: the Big 12 says possible sanctions could include withholding revenue and barring Texas Tech from the conference championship game this season. That threat comes while a visiting judge earlier this month granted Sorsby a temporary injunction clearing him to compete pending the broader NCAA eligibility process, and Sorsby’s lawyers argued Thursday that any conference action against him could violate that injunction.
The dispute is rooted in an NCAA investigation that found Sorsby bet on his own Indiana team in 2022 and that he made approximately $90,000 in bets over the past four years while enrolled at Indiana, Cincinnati and Texas Tech. Texas Tech was not a defendant in Sorsby’s separate lawsuit against the NCAA, a fact the Big 12 emphasizes as it seeks an independent judicial finding that it may apply its bylaws despite the ongoing NCAA case. For background on the injunction and the NCAA fight, see earlier coverage: Judge Clears Brendan Sorsby to Play as CFP Considers Texas Tech Ban and Brendan Sorsby: NCAA Denies Texas Tech’s Second Reinstatement Appeal.
The filing lands amid dueling public interventions from state officials. On Thursday, Attorney General Paxton warned the Big 12 that it could face "major legal liability" if it moves to punish Texas Tech for backing Sorsby. The next day an Oklahoma Attorney General urged the conference to take action against Texas Tech, calling the idea that the school should be shielded from conference discipline "meritless." That back-and-forth is central to the Big 12’s complaint: it not only asks a court to affirm the conference’s disciplinary authority but also to enjoin state officials from interfering with that authority.
Objectively, the complaint tightens the legal knot around a single practical question: can the Big 12 impose sanctions under its bylaws while a federal injunction protects Sorsby’s eligibility and while state officials threaten legal consequences for the conference? The Big 12 has asked the judge both to declare its powers and to issue a preliminary injunction that would clear the way for enforcement while the litigation proceeds.
What happens next will be decided by the federal judge who receives the complaint: the court must rule on the Big 12’s request for declaratory relief and on whether to grant a preliminary injunction. That decision will determine whether Texas Tech faces withheld revenue or exclusion from the conference title game while Sorsby’s eligibility fight with the NCAA and the related state-law threats remain unresolved.
