A South Carolina open-records advocate is taking the University of South Carolina to court over what he calls a lack of transparency in how the school handles millions in new student-athlete payments.
According to a lawsuit filed September 30 in Richland County, transparency activist Frank Heindel is suing the university after officials refused to release records detailing USC’s agreements to distribute more than $20 million in shared athletic revenue to student-athletes.
USC denied Heindel’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, claiming the school had no such documents — and that if they did exist, they would be protected under federal student privacy laws.
Heindel called that explanation both “contradictory and legally untenable.”
“I’m not asking for names or grade point averages. I’m asking how a public university spends public money,” Heindel told The State.
The push for transparency
Heindel submitted his request on September 4, seeking all executed revenue-sharing contracts or agreements between USC and its football players. The school rejected the request six days later, saying the documents were “scholastic records” protected by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).
“Therefore, there are no records responsive to your request,” USC’s FOIA coordinator wrote in the reply.
Heindel’s legal challenge comes as universities nationwide begin implementing revenue-sharing programs for student-athletes following the House v. NCAA settlement — a landmark decision requiring the NCAA to pay $2.8 billion in back compensation over the next decade.
As part of the agreement, participating schools can distribute up to $20.5 million annually to athletes beginning in the 2025–26 academic year, with incremental increases in subsequent years. South Carolina is among dozens of major programs in the SEC, ACC, Big Ten, and Big 12 expected to fully fund the initiative.
USC’s record-keeping questioned
This isn’t the first time the university has faced criticism over public-access requests. Earlier this year, The State newspaper filed a FOIA request for invoices from The Garnet Trust, USC’s name, image, and likeness (NIL) collective. After nearly three months, the university responded that it had no relevant records.
Observers believe that may be technically true — or that USC routed payments through private entities like The Gamecock Club (its booster arm) or Learfield, the athletics marketing firm that handles sponsorship deals such as the Blanchard CAT field logo at Williams-Brice Stadium. Both organizations are private and therefore not subject to FOIA laws.
What Heindel is asking for
In his lawsuit, Heindel requested that a judge either order USC to release the documents in full or hold a confidential review to determine which parts might legitimately be withheld.
“These are not trivial administrative documents,” Heindel wrote in his filing. “Transparency in such contracts is essential to ensure accountability in the use of taxpayer-supported athletic revenues.”
Heindel also cited a comment from women’s basketball coach Dawn Staley as evidence that the contracts are commercial, not academic.
“I stay within the revenue share budget that we have … We play games for money, and that money goes directly to our players,” Staley said earlier this year.
Heindel argued that statement shows the university treats athlete payments as institutional business expenses, not protected student records.
“Nobody is making any bones these aren’t commercial contracts,” Heindel said.
A long history of FOIA battles
This case marks Heindel’s second lawsuit against USC. In 2019, he sued the university for failing to properly respond to information requests. The case was dropped after USC agreed to centralize its FOIA process and improve response procedures.
Heindel, who has filed open-records requests for more than two decades, said this latest case is about upholding public accountability in the wake of a new era in college athletics finance.
A court hearing on the lawsuit is scheduled for Friday, October 10 in Columbia.
