TNS Newsfeed

By Murray Edwards

On July 24, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order aimed at reshaping the landscape of NIL regulations in college athletics. This move, described as an effort to “save college sports,” addresses the rapidly evolving and often chaotic environment surrounding athlete compensation, particularly following the 2021 Supreme Court ruling that allowed student-athletes to profit from endorsements and advertising deals. The executive order seeks to establish national standards for NIL programs, curb pay-for-play arrangements and protect non-revenue sports while ensuring the long-term viability of collegiate athletics.

The NCAA started the NIL era in July 2021, responding to legal challenges and new state laws, removed restrictions that had previously prevented college athletes from earning compensation for their name, image, and likeness. This change was prompted by a Supreme Court decision which enabled athletes to obtain endorsement agreements, modifying the longstanding amateurism model in college sports. Since then, the lack of federal regulations has resulted in various state laws, leading to different approaches across programs, where some institutions have been using NIL opportunities as part of their recruiting strategies.

The rise of booster-funded payments has led to competitive imbalances, as wealthier programs attract athletes with large offers, leaving smaller programs and non-revenue sports behind.

The executive order outlines several key objectives to address the complexities that have been created during the NIL era:

Prohibition of Pay-for-Play Payments: The order explicitly bans “third-party, pay-for-play” payments, distinguishing them from legitimate endorsement deals based on fair market value. It states that such payments are “improper and should not be permitted by universities,” aiming to curb booster-funded bidding wars that have fueled roster instability and competitive disparities. However, it allows athletes to earn compensation for genuine brand endorsements, preserving their ability to profit from their NIL.

Clarification of Athlete Employment Status: The order directs the Department of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to clarify whether college athletes can be considered employees of their schools. This move seeks to “maximize the educational benefits and opportunities” provided by athletic programs, amid ongoing debates about whether athletes should have employee rights, including collective bargaining. The NCAA and many universities have historically opposed classifying athletes as employees, citing financial burdens such as wages, benefits, and workers’ compensation.

Protection of Scholarships and Non-Revenue Sports: The order mandates that major athletic departments maintain scholarships for women’s and Olympic sports, emphasizing their role in American athletic success, particularly in international competitions like the Olympics. It highlights that 75% of the 2024 U.S. Olympic team were current or former collegiate athletes, underscoring the importance of preserving these programs.

Enforcement Mechanisms: The order instructs federal agencies, including the DOE, the FTC, and the DOJ, to develop enforcement plans within 30 days. These plans may leverage Title IX enforcement, federal funding decisions, and interstate commerce laws to ensure compliance, particularly at public universities. However, the order’s reliance on the word “should” rather than “shall” suggests it may lack binding authority, raising questions about its enforceability.

Call for Federal Uniformity: The order advocates for a national framework to replace the current patchwork of state NIL laws, which have created inconsistencies and competitive advantages for some states. It encourages collaboration with Congress and state governments to establish uniform standards that promote fairness, transparency, and oversight.

The executive order has received mixed responses from stakeholders in college athletics. NCAA President Charlie Baker expressed support, stating, “The Association appreciates the Trump Administration’s focus on the life-changing opportunities college sports provides millions of young people.” He emphasized the need for federal legislation to complement the order, a sentiment echoed by Republican Representatives Brett Guthrie, Tim Walberg, and Jim Jordan, who are pushing the SCORE Act to codify similar reforms.

However, critics argue that the order may limit athletes’ earning potential and tilt the balance of power back toward the NCAA and universities. Steve Berman, an attorney in the landmark House v. NCAA case, remarked, “Plain and simple, college athletes don’t need Trump’s help, and he shouldn’t be aiding the NCAA at the expense of athletes.” Senate Democrats, including Maria Cantwell, have also expressed skepticism about the SCORE Act, suggesting it could face challenges in Congress.

The order’s focus on clarifying athlete employment status has sparked particular debate. Some coaches, like Louisville’s Jeff Brohm, have suggested treating athletes as employees with a salary cap to stabilize the system, while others warn that such a move could impose significant financial burdens on universities. The issue is further complicated by varying state labor laws, particularly in “right-to-work” states where unionization faces resistance.

The executive order follows months of speculation about Trump’s interest in college sports reform, including earlier discussions about a potential college sports commission co-chaired by former Alabama coach Nick Saban and Texas Tech booster Cody Campbell. While those plans were not acted on, the order reflects Trump’s ongoing engagement with the issue, driven by concerns about the commercialization of college athletics and its impact on competitive balance and non-revenue sports.

The order aligns with broader efforts to address the fallout from the House v. NCAA settlement, which took effect on July 1, 2025, and introduced a revenue-sharing model allowing schools to directly pay athletes. The establishment of the College Sports Commission (CSC) and its NIL Go portal, in partnership with Deloitte, aims to ensure that NIL deals reflect fair market value and legitimate business purposes, a goal mirrored in Trump’s order.

The push for federal legislation, such as the SCORE Act, remains a priority for the NCAA and college administrators, who seek antitrust protection and preemption of state NIL laws. However, bipartisan support in Congress is uncertain, with Democrats expressing concerns that such measures could undermine athlete rights.