Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) speaks during a press conference at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., May 9, 2024.
Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images News | Getty Images
The Senate is scheduled to vote Monday to create a national framework for name, image and likeness rights in college sports, one of the final acts before Congress prepares to leave town later this week for the 2026 midterm elections.
The bill would codify the rights of athletes to earn NIL money and give the NCAA, conferences and schools a controversial antitrust exemption to enforce certain rules, and is the latest step in a years-long effort to regulate money in college sports.
The bill, dubbed the College Sports Protection Act, is co-sponsored by Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Sen. Maria Cantwell (D., Washington), the top Republican on the Senate Commerce Committee, and is expected to pass in the Senate. Its fate in the House remains uncertain amid opposition from outside groups including the Congressional Black Caucus and the NAACP.
“The NIL era has arrived, and the College Sports Protection Act embraces this new reality by codifying and protecting the rights of student-athletes to make money off their name, image and likeness, and establishing the rules necessary to end the chaos,” Cruz said on the Senate floor last week.
The bill would strengthen transfer rules and allow players to change schools just once without penalty. The maximum qualification is 5 years. It also increases revenue sharing funds available to schools to pay athletes directly. This could include up to $5 million going to women’s sports and Olympic sports, which tend to generate less revenue for schools than men’s soccer and basketball.
In the nearly five years since the NCAA suspended a long-standing ban on student compensation and loosened transfer rules following a series of legal rulings, lawmakers have introduced a flurry of bills and held multiple public hearings. The move ushered in a new era in college sports, where top athletes, especially in football and basketball, were free to transfer schools and earn $1 million NIL contracts.
But these new rules also had a downside. Small schools, women’s athletes, Olympians, fans, and coaches were dissatisfied with the growing power of the power conferences. Lawmakers are scrambling to respond, but previous attempts have repeatedly failed.
A similar bill, known as the SCORE Act, was previously removed from consideration in the House due to opposition from the Congressional Black Caucus.
The CBC, which has more than 50 members in both houses of Congress, said it could not support a bill that would benefit “major sports organizations that remain silent as black voting rights and black political power are systematically dismantled across the South.” The statement came on the heels of a Supreme Court ruling that hollowed out portions of the Voting Rights Act.
CBC also opposes the College Sports Protection Act, which other critics, including Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., say will give too much power to the NCAA and conferences at the expense of athletes.
“The core of this bill is to protect a system of exploitation. This bill protects the billions of dollars that coaches and sports industry executives make by suppressing pay for the world’s most valuable athletes,” Murphy said during a virtual press conference earlier this month. “This bill aims to provide unprecedented antitrust immunity to an industry that violates the law every day.”
If the College Sports Protection Act passes the Senate, its future in the House is uncertain and is not expected to be passed until after the Nov. 3 election. Mr. Cruz was in touch with House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) on Monday and believes Mr. Johnson will call the House back for a vote on the bill.
A House official familiar with the matter, speaking candidly on condition of anonymity, said it was “very unlikely” the House would take up the college sports bill again.
