Bishop Canevin junior quarterback Brady Wagner, ruled ineligible by the WPIAL and PIAA, can play at least for the next two weeks, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.

U.S. District Judge Marilyn Horan granted a request for a temporary restraining order that allows Wagner to compete in the Crusaders’ next two games, said attorney Steve Toprani, who represents Wagner and his parents, Ian and Natalie. Subsequently, the court will consider a lawsuit filed by Wagner’s parents seeking a temporary injunction that would let him play longer.

Wagner, who transferred from Mt. Lebanon, was ruled ineligible by the WPIAL following a hearing April 30, where the league found that his transfer was related to athletics. The PIAA upheld the WPIAL decision on appeal July 29.

The 6-foot-2, 170-pounder was in contention throughout the summer to start at quarterback for Bishop Canevin. The Crusaders host Seton LaSalle on Saturday at Dormont Stadium and visit Steel Valley on Sept. 5. Both are nonconference games.

“Brady is going to be at practice with the optimism of being a full participant in Saturday’s game,” Toprani said. “We still have to talk with the coaches to make sure everybody’s comfort level is there, but I fully expect to see him under center Saturday spinning the football. That’s exciting.”

The PIAA has warned schools in the past that if a player gains and later loses eligibility through court proceedings, a team would be forced to forfeit wins. Toprani said the PIAA has raised that concern here, too.

PIAA executive director Bob Lombardi did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

The Wagners’ lawsuit was filed last week in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court, but the PIAA had the case moved to federal court because it raised some constitutional issues, Toprani said. The family filed an amended complaint Monday seeking a temporary restraining order, and Horan held about a 90-minute hearing Tuesday morning.

“(The PIAA) argued that I had no basis to pursue rights for Brady in state court, and then they argued we had no right to do that in federal court,” Toprani said. “Thankfully we got a judge who heard the facts and the evidence and had a different viewpoint.”

A date for the subsequent hearing to decide the injunction was not yet scheduled.

“We will be back in court very soon to litigate the issues,” Toprani said.

This story will be updated.