The case, which began in March 2025 when the Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA) sued ATP, WTA, and all four Grand Slams along with a group of 15 current and former players including Nick Kyrgios, Riley Opelka, Sorana Cirstea, has finally progressed. A federal judge in New York rejected both tours’ attempts to dismiss the lawsuit entirely.

The lawsuit accused the ATP and WTA of functioning like a cartel, using the ranking-points system to effectively force players into sanctioned events regardless of better financial opportunities elsewhere. Alongside suppressing overall earnings, restricting players’ ability to control their own sponsorships and commercial rights, and subjecting them to invasive anti-doping procedures under the guise of integrity enforcement. 

Judge Margaret Garnett issued the ruling on Thursday, rejecting the dismissal bids from the Tours as well as the organizers of Wimbledon, the French Open, and the US Open. She found the claims carried enough weight to take them to the next stage of Litigation. A separate attempt to move the case to arbitration or have it dismissed for lack of jurisdiction was also rejected. 

Tennis Australia, responsible for the Australian Open, is no longer part of the case after reaching its own settlement last year, and two other parties, the sport’s anti-doping authority and World Tennis, were dropped from the lawsuit at the end of last year.

The Grand Slams were added as defendants that September after separate settlement talks between the tournaments and players broke down. The PTPA has said it consulted with more than 250 players, including a majority of the men’s and women’s top 20, before deciding to take the fight to court.

That’s why Thursday’s ruling is so important to the organizers. The ruling will allow the case to proceed into discovery, which could require the Tours and Grand Slams to turn over internal financial records and private communications that hardly remain confidential at the stage of litigation. That sort of transparency is more damaging than just losing a case in court, for organizations that have been claiming for years that their decisions to share revenues, or run their operations, were being made in good faith. 

The USTA responded Thursday evening by confirming it planned to defend itself against the claims. “The USTA has consistently operated in the best interests of the players and the sport,” the organization said, highlighting its recent prize money increases and ongoing investment in facilities and grassroots tennis programs as evidence of that approach.

PTPA treats the outcome as a long-awaited win

Thursday’s win meant a lot to the players’ side. PTPA executive director Romain Rosenberg called it the day that the organization had awaited for years. 

“For years, players were told this case would never get past the first hurdle,” he said. “It has. Every defendant stays. Every claim stays. The players’ association stays.” 

He also noted that Tennis Australia’s earlier settlement is an example for the other defendants, stating that the PTPA was open to similar discussions. PTPA co-founder Pospisil added that the decision upheld the association’s right to represent all players, not just those specifically identified in the lawsuit.

It is worth noting that the lawsuit has not been the only avenue players have pursued on these issues. In a separate move to the Grand Slams in 2025, a group of the sport’s highest-ranked men’s and women’s players sent a letter urging the tournament organizers to raise the prize money from 16 percent to 22 percent by 2030, and to improve their welfare and provide better consultation on decisions that impact the sport. 

That pressure campaign resulted directly in the Grand Slams setting up a Player Advisory Council that will allow players to have a more organized, albeit untested, seat at the table on matters outside of the court. 

Beyond the headline, Thursday’s decision has its own significance for PTPA’s future. The main face of the organization, Novak Djokovic, stepped away from the group entirely in January 2026 after the settlement with Tennis Australia, citing issues with transparency and how the organization portrayed him. It is also worth considering that the PTPA has also been dealing with its own internal conflict all year, and by dismissing the appeal, Garnett gives the association a stronger foothold for whatever comes next. 

The next steps are completely in the hands of the defendants. They may continue to litigate the lawsuit in court, which can be time-consuming and expensive and may result in additional discovery, depositions, and the eventual public disclosure of their internal communications. Alternatively, they can pursue settlements of their own, either independently or as a group, following the route Tennis Australia already took. 

Both tours can further challenge Judge’s decision, but that will not stop the discovery process in the litigation. The next hearing will be held on October 29, with each party submitting a joint letter outlining its next steps at least three business days before the hearing.