Latest news with #SCOREAct
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump set to sign executive order on national standards for college sports NIL
President Trump intends to sign an executive order in the coming days establishing national standards for the NCAA's Name, Image and Likeness program, which has reaped millions of dollars in revenue for top college athletes, according to multiple people familiar with his plans. College athletes can now make millions before ever going pro thanks to a set of NCAA rules enacted in 2021 that relaxed previous restrictions on being compensated for playing or accepting endorsement deals. Student athletes can now profit from merely showing up to play, or from jersey sales, autographs or serving as spokespeople for companies ranging from global brands to car dealerships near campus. Advertisement Mr. Trump is engaging on an issue that has quickly reshaped and, in many ways, roiled college athletics after a House subcommittee on Tuesday advanced a bill along party lines that would establish national standards for sponsorships. The legislation, called the "SCORE Act," would supersede a patchwork of state laws regulating Name, Image and Likeness, or NIL. While the bill has bipartisan support, there is also bipartisan concern it would give too much power to the NCAA and do little to protect the interests of college athletes. The NCAA's decision in 2021 to let athletes earn money from NIL deals followed years of political and legal pressure on the collegiate sports giant. For decades, the NCAA imposed steep limits on compensation for student athletes, which it argued were necessary to insulate college athletics from commercial pressures. But opponents — including many college athletes — had long argued the rules unfairly cut them out of the millions in revenue that sports like football and basketball can bring in for universities. Last month, in a massive shakeup, a federal judge signed off on a legal settlement in which the NCAA agreed to let schools pay student athletes directly. Advertisement Trump has regularly engaged with professional and college sports of all sorts since and even before retaking office. Whether attending the storied Army-Navy football game last December or stealing the spotlight at last Sunday's Club World Cup championship, the future of sports is a frequent presidential concern. The White House didn't immediately return requests for comment late Tuesday. Trump pushes senators to make $9.4 trillion in spending cuts L.A. Mayor Karen Bass says National Guard deployment in city was "a misuse" of soldiers Mike Johnson breaks from Trump, calls on DOJ to release Epstein files
CBS News
8 hours ago
- Business
- CBS News
Trump set to sign executive order on national standards for college sports NIL
President Trump intends to sign an executive order in the coming days establishing national standards for the NCAA's Name, Image and Likeness program, which has reaped millions of dollars in revenue for top college athletes, according to multiple people familiar with his plans. College athletes can now make millions before ever going pro thanks to a set of NCAA rules enacted in 2021 that relaxed previous restrictions on being compensated for playing or accepting endorsement deals. Student athletes can now profit from merely showing up to play, or from jersey sales, autographs or serving as spokespeople for companies ranging from global brands to car dealerships near campus. Mr. Trump is engaging on an issue that has quickly reshaped and, in many ways, roiled college athletics after a House subcommittee on Tuesday advanced a bill along party lines that would establish national standards for sponsorships. The legislation, called the "SCORE Act," would supersede a patchwork of state laws regulating Name, Image and Likeness, or NIL. While the bill has bipartisan support, there is also bipartisan concern it would give too much power to the NCAA and do little to protect the interests of college athletes. The NCAA's decision in 2021 to let athletes earn money from NIL deals followed years of political and legal pressure on the collegiate sports giant. For decades, the NCAA imposed steep limits on compensation for student athletes, which it argued were necessary to insulate college athletics from commercial pressures. But opponents — including many college athletes — had long argued the rules unfairly cut them out of the millions in revenue that sports like football and basketball can bring in for universities. Last month, in a massive shakeup, a federal judge signed off on a legal settlement in which the NCAA agreed to let schools pay student athletes directly. Trump has regularly engaged with professional and college sports of all sorts since and even before retaking office. Whether attending the storied Army-Navy football game last December or stealing the spotlight at last Sunday's Club World Cup championship, the future of sports is a frequent presidential concern. The White House didn't immediately return requests for comment late Tuesday.
USA Today
18 hours ago
- Politics
- USA Today
Despite criticism, college sports bill codifying NCAA rules clears first procedural hurdle
A bill in the U.S. House of Representatives that would codify critical aspects of college sports has cleared its first procedural hurdle − albeit along party lines, and despite pointed questions about its impact. At a markup hearing on Tuesday, July 15, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade voted to advance the college sports bill − known as the "SCORE Act" − to a full committee hearing, moving it one step closer to a potential vote on the House floor. The vote to advance the bill was 12-11, split along party lines. While the outcome of the markup will be welcomed by the bill's proponents, including subcommittee chair Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., it also came with plenty of pushback − both in the 24 hours prior to the hearing, and during it. Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass., was among those who spoke out most frequently and ardently against the bill, which includes antitrust protections for the NCAA and federal parameters around name-image-and-likeness (NIL) deals, among a number of other provisions. Trahan, a former college athlete, proposed several unsuccessful amendments to the legislation and expressed concern that, as written, it would put too much power in the hands of the NCAA, at the expense of athletes. "There is no enforcement mechanism. There is no recourse, right now, for states or for individuals. There is a liability shield into perpetuity, with no susnset, no revisiting by Congress," Trahan said of the SCORE Act (Student Compensation And Opportunity Through Rights and Endorsements). "So I want us all to understand that deeply before we go ahead. Because it doesn't feel pro-player, to me. It doesn't feel like this is an extension of athletes' rights. It feels like we're putting a couple of modest player protections into a bill based on what we know right now, and not being able to revisit it later and not giving them tools to advocate for themselves." Trahan's remarks echoed some of the criticism levied against the bill on July 14, ahead of the markup. Several union groups, including the unions that represent the five largest professional sports leagues in the United States, released statements opposing the bill, as did Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., who is the top Democrat on the Senate Commerce Committee. "'If you thought the dissolution of the Pac-12 was a heist, the SCORE Act is the National Championship of all heists," she said in a statement accompanying a letter to House subcommittee leaders, which was co-signed by Rep. Michael Baumgartner, R-Wash. Proponents of the bill, meanwhile, argued during the markup that the SCORE Act is the best avenue to restore order and structure to an increasingly chaotic college sports landscape. "This legislation will ensure that the integrity of college sports is maintained, while leveling the playing field and providing nationwide consistency," Rep. Brett Guthrie, R-Kentucky, said. Following the subcommittee's markup, the bill will now be put up for discussion before the full House Committee on Energy and Commerce. Rep. Guthrie said some of its provisions and impacts, including its potential impact on gender equity and Title IX, will receive further discussion from the Committee on Education and Workforce. After passing through those committees, the bill would then be eligible for discussion and a vote on the floor of the House. But it would likely face more questions and criticism in the Senate, where the Republicans hold a slim majority and Democrats have repeatedly expressed concerns about bills that grant too much power to the NCAA. "Now, I remember School House Rock, right? 'I'm just a bill, yeah, I'm only a bill, I'm sitting here on Capitol Hill,'" Southeastern Conference commissioner Greg Sankey said July 14. "So congratulations; we have a bill on Capitol Hill that is sitting and requires a great deal of more work. But I think the bipartisan effort represents an indication that college athletics, just as it does in football stadiums every Saturday can bring people together for conversation, and we hope the restoration of national standards for college athletics." Contact Tom Schad at tschad@ or on social media @
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Players' associations urge Congress to reject proposed bill granting NCAA antitrust exemption
Players' associations for the NFL, NBA, Major League Baseball, NHL and MLS issued a joint statement Monday urging Congress to reject proposed legislation that would grant the NCAA and its members an antitrust exemption to address NIL issues. The statement was in response to the Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements (SCORE) Act, introduced last week by members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. A markup on the bill is scheduled for Tuesday morning. Advertisement In their letter, the players' associations warned that an antitrust exemption would permit the NCAA and its members to 'collude to harm athletes.' 'Whatever progress the athletes have made has been a result of their use of the antitrust laws,' they wrote. 'The SCORE Act would take that weapon away from them.' The proposed legislation from seven Republican and two Democratic sponsors prevents athletes from obtaining employment status and mirrors many of the terms from the recent House vs. NCAA settlement. It would officially end most administrative restrictions on athletes' NIL compensation, but it allows schools and conferences to establish what is and isn't permissible. Should the federal legislation pass, it would override current state NIL laws, which vary from state to state. Earlier Monday, two members of Congress from the state of Washington, Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, and Republican Rep. Michael Baumgartner, issued a similar statement urging the House committee to delay the markup until there are significant changes. Advertisement 'The bill appears to be a product of the richest conferences to cement into place the current power structure in college athletics that would leave only the wealthiest schools able to compete at the highest levels of college athletics,' the statement said. All of the Power 5 conferences previously issued a statement endorsing the SCORE Act. 'In the absence of federal standards, student-athletes and schools have been forced to navigate a fractured regulatory framework for too long,' they wrote. 'Following the historic House settlement, this bill represents a very encouraging step toward delivering the national clarity and accountability that college athletics desperately needs.' Advertisement Last week, the NCAA said in a statement that it 'has made long overdue changes, mandating health and wellness benefits and ushering in a new system for Division I programs to provide up to 50 percent of athletic department revenue to student-athletes, but some of the most important changes can only come from Congress.' 'This bill reflects many student-athletes' priorities, and the NCAA is committed to working with Congress to build a bipartisan path forward that ensures the long-term success of college sports and the ongoing opportunities they provide to young people,' wrote Tim Buckley, the NCAA's senior vice president of external affairs. SEC commissioner Greg Sankey also praised the bill Monday. 'I think what's happening in college athletics is a nonpartisan issue, but using the typical nomenclature, to have members of both of our major political parties willing to step out and introduce the SCORE Act, is a positive step,' he said. The players' associations' letter noted that only two industries in the United States have antitrust law exemptions: railroads and Major League Baseball (partially). Advertisement 'The NCAA should not have a blank check to impose (its) will on the financial future of over 500,000 college athletes,' they wrote. This article originally appeared in The Athletic. College Football, Men's College Basketball, Women's College Basketball, College Sports 2025 The Athletic Media Company
NBC Sports
a day ago
- Politics
- NBC Sports
Pro sports unions urge Congress not to give antitrust exemptions to colleges
The NCAA and its member institutions have a mess, thanks to decades of corruption that prevented athletes from making money, directly or indirectly. They can either clean it up on their own, or they can run to Congress. For now, they're running to Congress. And the American pro sports unions have aligned to ask Congress not to give the NCAA and its members what they want — an antitrust exemption that would allow them to impose rules regarding matters like player pay and movement. 'Since many of today's college athletes will become our future members, we have a vested interest in ensuring they are protected now,' the unions said in a statement. As the Energy and Commerce Committee considers the Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements (SCORE) Act, the Players Associations strongly urge Committee Members to reject any antitrust exemption or legal liability shield from legislation regulating college athletics,' the unions said. 'Whatever progress the athletes have made has been a result of their use of the antitrust laws. The SCORE Act would take that weapon away from them. . . . Granting an antitrust exemption to the NCAA and its members gives the green light for the organization and schools to collude and work against student athletes. . . . Historically, antitrust exemptions have been used to set prices, limit wages, and restrict access to opportunities provided by open markets, all while shielding abuse from legal recourse. . . . It is not hard to imagine a situation where NCAA and its members collude to restrict revenue sharing and deny student athletes fair compensation with the confidence of immunity against legal action. Indeed, they have been doing exactly that for decades.' Amen to all of that. The NCAA and its members should be expected to solve this problem on their own, without an antitrust exemption from the federal government. Congress should not give them a Hail Mary. They should be required to invite unionization, and to deal with the players on a level playing field.
