{"id":304964,"date":"2025-10-15T09:08:15","date_gmt":"2025-10-15T09:08:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/304964\/"},"modified":"2025-10-15T09:08:15","modified_gmt":"2025-10-15T09:08:15","slug":"after-house-v-ncaa-will-congress-or-the-white-house-bring-order-to-college-sports-sport","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/304964\/","title":{"rendered":"After House v. NCAA: Will Congress Or The White House Bring Order To College Sports? &#8211; Sport"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Seyfarth Shaw LLP are most popular: <\/p>\n<ul>&#13;<\/p>\n<li>within Compliance, Consumer Protection, Government and Public Sector topic(s)<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<\/p>\n<li>with readers working within the Banking &amp; Credit, Business &amp; Consumer Services and Retail &amp; Leisure industries<\/li>\n<p>&#13;\n                    <\/ul>\n<p>Since the House v. NCAA settlement went into effect in&#13;<br \/>\nJuly 2025, the federal government has proposed three regulatory&#13;<br \/>\nresponses to concerns surrounding the future of college sports: the&#13;<br \/>\nSCORE Act, the newly introduced SAFE Act, and President Trump&#8217;s&#13;<br \/>\n&#8220;Saving College Sports&#8221; Executive Order. Each seeks to&#13;<br \/>\ndefine the future of athlete compensation, protect non-revenue&#13;<br \/>\nsports, and establish the role of federal oversight. Yet, despite&#13;<br \/>\ntheir ambitious aims, none of these measures has made meaningful&#13;<br \/>\nprogress, leaving universities without the clarity and stability&#13;<br \/>\nthey urgently need to navigate this post-House&#13;<br \/>\nlandscape.<\/p>\n<p>Current Status of the House Settlement<\/p>\n<p>Since July, universities across the country have raced to&#13;<br \/>\nimplement the requirements of the House settlement&#13;<br \/>\n(discussed in more detail <a href=\"http:\/\/www.mondaq.com\/redirection.asp?article_id=1691922&amp;company_id=7122&amp;redirectaddress=https:\/\/www.laborandemploymentlawcounsel.com\/2025\/06\/green-light-for-a-new-era-final-approval-of-house-v-ncaa-settlement-ushers-in-historic-change-for-college-athletics-and-a-complex-compliance-roadmap-for-schools\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">here<\/a>). Those efforts, however, have faced&#13;<br \/>\nsignificant obstacles \u2013 including legal challenges to roster&#13;<br \/>\nlimits, uncertainty over how revenue sharing complies with Title&#13;<br \/>\nIX, the looming unresolved question of student-athlete employment&#13;<br \/>\nstatus pending in Johnson v. NCAA, and the logistical&#13;<br \/>\ncomplexity of managing direct athlete compensation.<\/p>\n<p>Implementation has been further complicated by the&#13;<br \/>\nsettlement&#8217;s mandate that all athlete deals be disclosed to&#13;<br \/>\n\u2013 and approved by \u2013 the newly formed College Sports&#13;<br \/>\nCommission (CSC)(discussed <a href=\"http:\/\/www.mondaq.com\/redirection.asp?article_id=1691922&amp;company_id=7122&amp;redirectaddress=https:\/\/www.laborandemploymentlawcounsel.com\/2025\/05\/inside-the-house-v-ncaa-settlements-new-nil-oversight-regime-12-steps-power-conferences-and-a-compliance-balancing-act\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">here<\/a>). The CSC has struggled to keep pace with&#13;<br \/>\nthe sheer volume of submissions. Between June 11, 2025 and August&#13;<br \/>\n31, 2025, universities submitted 8,539 deals (valued at&#13;<br \/>\napproximately $80 million; as of September only 6,090 (valued at&#13;<br \/>\n$35.42 million) had been approved1. Approvals have been&#13;<br \/>\nreported as taking several weeks or more. With college football&#13;<br \/>\nseason in full swing, and basketball season approaching, delayed&#13;<br \/>\ndeal approval can mean lost opportunity for both universities and&#13;<br \/>\nathletes. Several news outlets have reported that some collectives&#13;<br \/>\nhave begun circumventing the approval process entirely, paying&#13;<br \/>\nathletes before their deals have cleared the system.<\/p>\n<p>The SCORE Act<\/p>\n<p>In July 2025, anticipating the challenges and unresolved legal&#13;<br \/>\nissues following House, a bipartisan group of U.S. House&#13;<br \/>\nRepresentatives introduced the Student Compensation and Opportunity&#13;<br \/>\nthrough Rights and Endorsements (SCORE) Act. Despite initially&#13;<br \/>\npassing through committee in the House of Representatives, the&#13;<br \/>\nSCORE Act is currently stalled. A full House vote has been&#13;<br \/>\nrepeatedly delayed.<\/p>\n<p>The SCORE Act seeks to bring uniformity and legal clarity to the&#13;<br \/>\nchaotic and rapidly evolving world of college sports. It addresses&#13;<br \/>\nthree major concerns that have plagued the NCAA and its member&#13;<br \/>\ninstitutions:<\/p>\n<ol>&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>Antitrust Protection:<\/strong> Grants the NCAA and&#13;<br \/>\nathletic conferences a limited exemption from antitrust suits,&#13;<br \/>\nshielding them from the wave of lawsuits that have challenged their&#13;<br \/>\nauthority and practices.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>Federal Preemption of State Laws:<\/strong> Overrides&#13;<br \/>\nthe patchwork of state NIL (Name, Image, and Likeness) laws, which&#13;<br \/>\nhave created inconsistent rules across the country.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>Preserving Amateur Status:<\/strong> Bars college&#13;<br \/>\nathletes from being classified as employees, thereby excluding them&#13;<br \/>\nfrom labor protections and collective bargaining rights.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;\n<\/ol>\n<p>While the bill has bipartisan support, it has also drawn&#13;<br \/>\ncriticism from both ends of the political spectrum. Key figures&#13;<br \/>\nlike Rep. Michael Baumgartner (R-Wash.) and Sen. Maria Cantwell&#13;<br \/>\n(D-Wash.) argue that the bill disproportionately benefits the Power&#13;<br \/>\nFive conferences and fails to protect smaller schools, Olympic&#13;<br \/>\nsports, and women&#8217;s athletics. Athletes.org, a players&#13;<br \/>\nassociation representing thousands of college athletes, has&#13;<br \/>\ncondemned the bill as a &#8220;grave step in the wrong&#13;<br \/>\ndirection,&#8221;2 pointing to provisions that:<\/p>\n<ul>&#13;<\/p>\n<li>Limit athletes&#8217; ability to monetize their NIL by imposing&#13;<br \/>\nsubjective restrictions;<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li>Cap school payments without athlete input;<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li>Restrict transfer rights, contrary to recent court rulings;&#13;<br \/>\nand<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li>Prohibit athletes from being classified as employees, denying&#13;<br \/>\nthem labor protections.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;\n<\/ul>\n<p>In a joint statement, Athletes.org and other players&#13;<br \/>\nassociations warned that the bill entrenches institutional power&#13;<br \/>\nwhile silencing athlete voices. They argue that legislation&#13;<br \/>\ngoverning college sports should be developed in partnership with&#13;<br \/>\nathletes\u2014not imposed unilaterally from the top&#13;<br \/>\ndown.3<\/p>\n<p>The SAFE Act<\/p>\n<p>On September 29, 2025, while the SCORE Act is currently stalled,&#13;<br \/>\nSenate Democrats introduced the Student Athlete Fairness and&#13;<br \/>\nEnforcement (&#8220;SAFE&#8221;) Act. The bill seeks to stabilize&#13;<br \/>\ncollege athletics by prioritizing athlete welfare and protecting&#13;<br \/>\nnonrevenue sports. Its notable provisions include:<\/p>\n<ul>&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>Media Rights Consolidation:<\/strong> Amends the Sports&#13;<br \/>\nBroadcasting Act to allow conferences to pool broadcasting rights,&#13;<br \/>\nenabling collective media deals that boost revenue and sustain&#13;<br \/>\nOlympic and nonrevenue sports.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>Protection for Olympic Sports:<\/strong> Requires&#13;<br \/>\nschools to maintain scholarship and roster spots for Olympic sports&#13;<br \/>\nat 2023\u201324 levels, safeguarding programs often cut during&#13;<br \/>\nbudget shortfalls.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>Athlete Mobility and Support:<\/strong> Permits athletes&#13;<br \/>\nto transfer twice without penalty, guarantees scholarships and&#13;<br \/>\nmedical coverage post-eligibility, and allows international&#13;<br \/>\nathletes to be compensated without jeopardizing their visa&#13;<br \/>\nstatus.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>Agent Regulation:<\/strong> Creates a registry for&#13;<br \/>\nathlete agents and caps agent fees to reduce exploitation.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>Revenue Distribution Oversight:<\/strong> Established a&#13;<br \/>\nnew committee to pool and distribute media rights and revenues to&#13;<br \/>\nschools, enforced by the Federal Trade Commission and state&#13;<br \/>\nattorneys general.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;\n<\/ul>\n<p>SAFE Act vs. SCORE Act: Key Differences<\/p>\n<p>The SAFE Act stands in stark contrast to the SCORE Act in&#13;<br \/>\nseveral areas:<\/p>\n<ul>&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>Athlete Protections:<\/strong> The SAFE Act offers&#13;<br \/>\nstronger protections for athletes, including post-eligibility&#13;<br \/>\nbenefits and transfer flexibility. The SCORE Act imposes tighter&#13;<br \/>\nrestrictions on NIL and transfers.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>Support for Nonrevenue Sports:<\/strong> The SAFE Act&#13;<br \/>\nexplicitly protects Olympic and women&#8217;s sports, while critics&#13;<br \/>\nargue the SCORE Act risks cutting them due to funding&#13;<br \/>\nconstraints.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>No Antitrust Shield:<\/strong> The SAFE Act does not&#13;<br \/>\noffer an antitrust shield for the NCAA or conferences, while the&#13;<br \/>\nSCORE Act does.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>No Employment Classification Clause:<\/strong> The SAFE&#13;<br \/>\nAct avoids addressing whether athletes should be considered&#13;<br \/>\nemployees, leaving the door open to future legal and legislative&#13;<br \/>\ndevelopments. The SCORE Act expressly bars athletes from being&#13;<br \/>\nclassified as employees.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;\n<\/ul>\n<p>Initial feedback on the SAFE Act reveals support from athlete&#13;<br \/>\nadvocacy groups and smaller schools, while the NCAA and Power Five&#13;<br \/>\nconferences remain skeptical. The NCAA and major conferences are&#13;<br \/>\nlikely to oppose the bill because it omits their top priorities:&#13;<br \/>\nantitrust protection and an explicit bar on athlete employee&#13;<br \/>\nstatus. Leaders in the SEC and Big Ten have also criticized the&#13;<br \/>\nproposal to consolidate media rights, warning it could weaken their&#13;<br \/>\nindividual bargaining power and revenue streams.<\/p>\n<p>The &#8220;Saving College Sports&#8221; Executive Order<\/p>\n<p>In July 2025, President Trump issued the &#8220;Saving College&#13;<br \/>\nSports&#8221; executive order, calling for a national solution to&#13;<br \/>\nprotect collegiate athletics \u2013 especially women&#8217;s and&#13;<br \/>\nnon-revenue sports vulnerable to cuts. The order:<\/p>\n<ul>&#13;<\/p>\n<li>Requires revenue-sharing models to preserve or expand&#13;<br \/>\nscholarships and opportunities in women&#8217;s and non-revenue&#13;<br \/>\nsports.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li>Prohibits third-party pay-for-play payments.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li>Sets scholarship and roster requirements for the 2025\u201326&#13;<br \/>\nseason, tied to athletic department revenues.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;\n<\/ul>\n<p>It also established agency deadlines:<\/p>\n<ul>&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>August 23, 2025<\/strong>: The Secretary of Education,&#13;<br \/>\nwith the Attorney General, the Secretary of Health and Human&#13;<br \/>\nServices (HHS), and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission&#13;<br \/>\n(FTC), was tasked with developing a regulatory and enforcement&#13;<br \/>\nplan.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>September 22, 2025<\/strong>: The Attorney General and&#13;<br \/>\nFTC were directed to propose litigation strategies and policy&#13;<br \/>\nguidelines.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;<br \/>\n&#13;<\/p>\n<li><strong>Ongoing:<\/strong> The Department of Labor (DOL) and the&#13;<br \/>\nNational Labor Relations Board (NLRB) were instructed to clarify&#13;<br \/>\nathlete employment status.<\/li>\n<p>&#13;\n<\/ul>\n<p>As of the date of this article, no federal guidance has been&#13;<br \/>\npublished. The DOL and NLRB, in particular, remain silent \u2013&#13;<br \/>\nthe latter unable to act since January 27, 2025 when it lost quorum&#13;<br \/>\nand could no longer issue decisions.<\/p>\n<p>Steps In The Right Direction<\/p>\n<p>While the executive order lacks the force of legislation like&#13;<br \/>\nthe SAFE or SCORE Acts, it signals the White House&#8217;s policy&#13;<br \/>\npriorities. It focus on preserving women&#8217;s and non-revenue&#13;<br \/>\nsports and opposing third-party pay-for-play aligns more closely&#13;<br \/>\nwith the SAFE Act than with the SCORE Act&#8217;s institutional&#13;<br \/>\nprotections. If federal agencies follow through with consistent&#13;<br \/>\nguidance, universities may gain some near-term clarity on&#13;<br \/>\nHouse compliance and the evolving legal landscape&#13;<br \/>\ngoverning college sports.<\/p>\n<p>More broadly, legislative reform efforts in this space are not&#13;<br \/>\nnew, but the SAFE Act has made more progress towards gaining&#13;<br \/>\nnecessary support than other previously proposed legislation, and&#13;<br \/>\ncurrent publicized response to the SCORE Act suggests that it, too,&#13;<br \/>\nmay receive bipartisan support. If implemented, any of these&#13;<br \/>\npost-House measures would provide the critical direction&#13;<br \/>\nto universities and other stakeholders navigating the future of&#13;<br \/>\ncollege athlete compensation.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Footnotes<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>1. Updated NIL Deal Flow Report, dated Sept. 5, 2025,&#13;<br \/>\navailable at&#13;<br \/>\nhttps:\/\/assets.tina.io\/29b83311-e587-42b1-861e-87ebde9aa253\/NIL%20Deal%20Flow%20Report%209.5.25.pdf<\/p>\n<p>2.&#13;<br \/>\nhttps:\/\/www.athletes.org\/news\/college-athletes-speak-out-against-the-score-act-unite-as-athletes-org-executive-committee\/<\/p>\n<p>3.&#13;<br \/>\nhttps:\/\/www.athletes.org\/news\/the-score-act-is-detrimental-to-all-college-athletes-and-all-college-sports-athletes-org-details-why\/<\/p>\n<p>The content of this article is intended to provide a general&#13;<br \/>\nguide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought&#13;<br \/>\nabout your specific circumstances.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Seyfarth Shaw LLP are most popular: &#13; within Compliance, Consumer Protection, Government and Public Sector topic(s) &#13; with&hellip;\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":304965,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[44],"tags":[1339,1317,1337,1338,62,67,132,68],"class_list":{"0":"post-304964","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-ncaa-basketball","8":"tag-basketball","9":"tag-ncaa","10":"tag-ncaa-basketball","11":"tag-ncaabasketball","12":"tag-sports","13":"tag-united-states","14":"tag-unitedstates","15":"tag-us"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115377400563182257","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/304964","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=304964"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/304964\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/304965"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=304964"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=304964"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=304964"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}