Donald Trump NIL executive order shouldn't excited college leaders
So now we wait. For something - or maybe nothing. With the Trump Administration, you can never quite tell.
What we do know, however, is that the White House has, in fact, been working on something in the form of a likely executive order since Trump met with former Alabama coach Nick Saban at the school's graduation ceremony in May.
Regardless of what's ultimately in it, however, coaches and administrators should resist the temptation to get excited about the possibility of Trump saving the day for a few simple, but important reasons.
An executive order isn't a law. College sports and the NCAA do not operate under the purview of the executive branch of the federal government, thus any executive order compelling them to do anything would be legally questionable at best. And finally, any so-called "fix" for college sports made with the stroke of one man's pen can be undone by the next one who occupies that office.
UNWANTED TALK: Nick Saban rumor is last thing Alabama needs
Sorry, college sports executives. You're going to have to actually do the work on this one.
We know that's not easy, which makes the temptation to rely on Trump more tempting. It's been nearly six years since the NCAA pivoted toward begging Congress for relief from its never-ending string of lawsuits, and so far they've gotten no reward for their effort. Unless, of course, you consider it a reward to be dragged into more committee hearings to answer ridiculous, superficial questions from legislators who know as much about college sports as they do about the Finnish language.
Oh sure, there's another bill on the way. And this one apparently has bipartisan support in the House. But then there's the Senate, where the top Democrat on the Senate Commerce Committee, Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., last week called it "the National Championship of all heists" because it is too favorable to the NCAA's interests. Remember, any bill must get 60 votes due to filibuster rules in the Senate, which means a minimum of seven Democrats will need to sign off on it. That's not going to be easy, especially if it puts hard caps on how much college athletes can earn and eliminates the potential to bargain collectively for their rights in the future.
Purely from a political standpoint, I'm not sure why Senate Democrats would cooperate at all here. If a bill finally passes that fixes some issues with the NCAA, they won't get credit - because Trump will take it. And he'll play it to the hilt, which doesn't seem particularly helpful to their electoral goals heading into the midterms next year.
That's just how stuff works in Washington, and both parties play that game on issues far more serious and important than the NCAA's ability to regulate the transfer portal. It's part of why the NCAA's "let Congress fix our mess" strategy has been a complete failure thus far and may never pay off. At the end of the day, there's a lot more upside for Congress to use college sports as a political plaything than to make a law that will only impact a relatively small number of people and isn't an urgent matter of national interest.
But a "let Trump fix it" strategy could be worse, particularly right now as institutions are scrambling to implement terms of the House vs. NCAA settlement that allow athletic departments to pay their athletes directly.
At the moment, the House settlement and the College Sports Commission - a regulatory body created by the power conferences to enforce the settlement rules - hold the key to how college sports will operate over the next several years.
Will the CSC get sued by athletes and booster collectives whose deals get denied because they aren't considered true NIL? Of course, but they already knew that. Unless Congress quickly grants college sports some type of antitrust exemption, the CSC will have to go in front of a judge and show that it follows the law to continue having regulatory power over college athletes' paychecks.
That's really the only issue worth talking about right now, regardless of what Trump may write in an executive order. And what can he possibly do anyway? Maybe he can decree that college athletes can't be made employees through some type of National Labor Relations Board policy -- but they already aren't.
So unless the NCAA is going to become a federal agency, where the president would have significant legal authority to regulate it, anything in an executive order is mostly going to be performative. And anything that touches actual NCAA business like the transfer portal or limiting how athletes earn money stands on far shakier legal ground than the guardrails that were already installed through the House settlement.
Regardless of which direction a president wants to take college sports - any president, for the record - the fundamental problem will not change no matter who's in the office or how many executive orders they write.
By refusing to engage in a true collective bargaining effort that mimics the relationship between the NFL/NBA/NHL/MLB and their respective players associations, the college sports industry left itself in a vulnerable position where any attempt to enforce its rules will face legal scrutiny.
For better or worse, that's the American Way. And at this point, the focus of college sports should be long-term stability through the appropriate legal and legislative means instead of a flimsy proclamation.
Colleges need to be especially careful right now. We've seen how the Trump Administration strongarms schools it has ideological disagreements with: Withholding federal grants, deporting international students, pressuring university presidents to resign. His involvement in college sports issues on behalf of the NCAA's immediate interests is going to inevitably create the appearance of long-term leverage.
As frustrated as college sports executives might be with Jeffrey Kessler and other sports attorneys who keep them in court, creating space for tussles with this White House might not be the best tradeoff.
Keep all that in mind when Trump issues his mysterious executive order. Because at the end of the day, only the people in charge of college sports can truly save it - no matter how much a president is itching to claim credit for doing so.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Carol Moseley Braun, first black female senator: 'Sexism is harder to change than racism'
'Oh, I wish I was in the land of cotton … ' Carol Moseley Braun was riding a lift in the US Capitol building when she heard Dixie, the unofficial anthem of the slave-owning Confederacy during the civil war. 'The sound was not very loud, yet it pierced my ears with the intensity of a dog whistle,' Moseley Braun writes in her new memoir, Trailblazer. 'Indeed, that is what it was in a sense.' The first African American woman in the Senate soon realised that 'Dixie' was being sung by Jesse Helms, a Republican senator from North Carolina. He looked over his spectacles at Moseley Braun and grinned. Then he told a fellow senator in the lift: 'I'm going to make her cry. I'm going to sing Dixie until she cries.' But clearly, Moseley Braun notes, the senator had never tangled with a Black woman raised on the south side of Chicago. She told him calmly: 'Senator Helms, your singing would make me cry even if you sang Rock of Ages.' Moseley Braun was the sole African American in the Senate during her tenure between 1993 and 1999, taking on legislative initiatives that included advocating for farmers, civil rights and domestic violence survivors, and went on to run for president and serve as US ambassador to New Zealand. In a wide-ranging interview with the Guardian from her home in Chicago, she recalls her history-making spell in office, argues that sexism is tougher to crack than racism and warns that the Democratic party is 'walking around in a daze' as it struggles to combat Donald Trump. As for that incident with Helms, she looks back now and says: 'I had been accustomed to what we now call microaggressions, so I just thought he was being a jerk.' Moseley Braun was born in the late 1940s in the post-war baby boom. Her birth certificate listed her as 'white' due to her mother's light complexion and the hospital's racial segregation, a detail she later officially corrected. She survived domestic abuse from her father, who could be 'a loving advocate one minute, and an absolute monster the next', and has been guided by her religious faith. In 1966, at the age of 19, she joined a civil rights protest led by Martin Luther King. She recalls by phone: 'He was a powerful personality. You felt drawn into him because of who he was. I had no idea he was being made into a modern saint but I was happy to be there and be supportive. 'When it got violent, they put the women and children close to Dr King in concentric circles and so I was close enough to touch him. I had no idea at the time it was going to be an extraordinary point in my life but it really was.' Moseley Braun was the first in her family to graduate from college and one of few women and Black students in her law school class, where she met her future husband. In the 1970s she won a longshot election to the Illinois general assembly and became the first African American woman to serve as its assistant majority leader. But when she planned a historic run for the Senate, Moseley Braun met widespread scepticism. 'Have you lost all your mind? Why are you doing this? But it made sense to me at the time and I followed my guiding light. You do things that seem like the right thing to do and, if it make sense to you, you go for it.' Moseley Braun's campaign team included a young political consultant called David Axelrod, who would go on to be a chief strategist and senior adviser to Obama. She came from behind to win the Democratic primary, rattling the party establishment, then beat Republican Richard Williamson in the general election. She was the first Black woman elected to the Senate and only the fourth Black senator in history. When Moseley Braun arrived for her first day at work in January 1993, there was a brutal reminder of how far the US still had to travel: a uniformed guard outside the US Capitol told her, 'Ma'am, you can't go any further,' and gestured towards a side-entrance for visitors. At the time she did not feel that her trailblazing status conferred a special responsibility, however. 'I wish I had. I didn't. I was going to work. I was going to do what I do and then show up to vote on things and be part of the legislative process. I had been a legislator for a decade before in the state legislature so I didn't at the time see it as being all that different from what I'd been doing before. I was looking forward to it and it turned out to be all that I expected and more.' But it was not to last. Moseley Braun served only one term before being defeated by Peter Fitzgerald, a young Republican who was heir to a family banking fortune and an arch conservative on issues such as abortion rights. But that did not deter her from running in the Democratic primary election for president in 2004. 'It was terrible,' she recalls. 'I couldn't raise the money to begin with and so I was staying on people's couches and in airports. It was a hard campaign and the fact it was so physically demanding was a function of the fact that I didn't have the campaign organisation or the money to do a proper campaign for president. 'I was being derided by any commentator who was like, 'Look, this girl has lost her mind,' and so they kind of rolled me off and that made it hard to raise money, hard to get the acceptance in the political class. But I got past that. My ego was not so fragile that that it hurt my feelings to make me stop. I kept plugging away.' Eventually Moseley Braun dropped out and endorsed Howard Dean four days before the opening contest, the Iowa caucuses. Again, she had been the only Black woman in the field, challenging long-held assumptions of what a commander-in-chief might look like. 'That had been part and parcel of my entire political career. People saying: 'What are you doing here? Why are you here? Don't run, you can't possibly win because you're not part of the show and the ways won't open for you because you're Black and because you're a woman.' I ran into that every step of the way in my political career.' Since then, four Black women have followed in her footsteps to the Senate: Kamala Harris and Laphonza Butler of California, Angela Alsobrooks of Maryland and Lisa Blunt Rochester of Delaware. Moseley Braun says: 'I was happy of that because I was determined not to be the last of the Black women in the Senate. The first but not the last. That was a good thing, and so far the progress has been moving forward. But then we got Donald Trump and that trumped everything.' Harris left the Senate to become the first woman of colour to serve as vice-president, then stepped in as Democrats' presidential nominee after Joe Biden abandoned his bid for re-election. Moseley Braun comments: 'I thought she did as good a job as she could have. I supported her as much as I knew how to do and I'm sorry she got treated so badly and she lost like she did. You had a lot of sub rosa discussions of race and gender that she should have been prepared for but she wasn't.' Trump exploited the 'manosphere' of podcasters and influencers and won 55% of men in 2024, up from 50% of men in 2020, according to Pew Research. Moseley Braun believes that, while the country has made strides on race, including the election of Obama as its first Black president in 2008, it still lags on gender. 'I got into trouble for saying this but it's true: sexism is a harder thing to change than racism. I had travelled fairly extensively and most of the world is accustomed to brown people being in positions of power. But not here in the United States. We haven't gotten there yet and so that's something we've got to keep working on.' Does she expect to see a female president in her lifetime? 'I certainly hope so. I told my little grandniece that she could be president if she wanted to. She looked at me like I lost my mind. 'But Auntie Carol, all the presidents are boys.'' Still, Trump has not been slow to weaponise race over the past decade, launching his foray into politics with a mix of false conspiracy theories about Obama's birthplace and promises to build a border wall and drive out criminal illegal immigrants. Moseley Braun recalls: 'It was racial, cultural, ethnic, et cetera, backlash. He made a big deal out of the immigration issue, which was racism itself and people are still being mistreated on that score. 'They've been arresting people for no good reason, just because they look Hispanic. The sad thing about it is that they get to pick and choose who they want to mess with and then they do. It's too destructive of people's lives in very negative ways.' Yet her fellow Democrats have still not found an effective way to counter Trump, she argues. 'The Democratic party doesn't know what to do. It's walking around in a daze. The sad thing about it is that we do need a more focused and more specific response to lawlessness.' Five years after the police murder of George Floyd and death of Congressman John Lewis, there are fears that many of the gains of the civil rights movement are being reversed. Over the past six months Trump has issued executive orders that aim to restrict or eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. He baselessly blamed DEI for undermining air safety after an army helicopter pilot was involved in a deadly midair collision with a commercial airliner. Meanwhile, Washington DC dismantled Black Lives Matter Plaza in response to pressure from Republicans in Congress. None of it surprises Moseley Braun. 'It should have been expected. He basically ran on a platform of: 'I'm going to be take it back to the 1800s. Enough of this pandering and coddling of Black people.'' But she has seen enough to take the long view of history. 'This is normal. The pendulum swings both ways. We have to put up with that fact and recognise that this is the normal reaction to the progress we've made. There's bound to be some backsliding. More than 30 years have passed since Moseley Braun, wearing a peach business suit and clutching her Bible, was sworn into the Senate by the vice-president, Dan Quayle. Despite what can seem like baby steps forward and giant leaps back, she has faith that Americans will resist authoritarianism. 'I'm very optimistic, because people value democracy,' he says. 'If they get back to the values undergirding our democracy, we'll be fine. I hope that people don't lose heart and don't get so discouraged with what this guy's doing. 'If they haven't gotten there already, the people in the heartland will soon recognise this is a blatant power grab that's all about him and making a fortune for himself and his family and has nothing to do with the common good. That's what public life is supposed to be about. It's public service.'
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Trump calls for Obama's arrest with jaw-dropping Truth Social post after Tulsi Gabbard claimed ex-president was behind 'years-long coup'
President Trump has called for Barack Obama to be arrested after spy chief Tulsi Gabbard claimed the former leader was behind a 'years-long coup' against him. Gabbard, the Director of National Intelligence, declassified hundreds of documents on Friday related to the investigation in to alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election. She claimed the emails reveal a conspiracy by Obama to try and subvert Trump's win by using 'manufactured and politicized intelligence' to make it seem like bad actors may have influenced the result. 'Their goal was to subvert the will of the American people and enact what was essentially a years-long coup with the objective of trying to usurp the President from fulfilling the mandate bestowed upon him by the American people,' Gabbard said. Her claims were reiterated by Trump who republished her interviews with Fox and several others about the issue on Truth Social. And on Sunday, he escalated things further by reposting an AI-generated TikTok which showed Obama being apprehended and placed in handcuffs along with the message, 'No one is above the law'. Gabbard released an 114-page document she says shows the Obama administration was aware that there was no threat of Russia 'directly' manipulating the vote in 2016. She called for an investigatio n into and potential criminal prosecution of anyone who took part – which may include the ex-President and James Comey, the former FBI director. The documents revealed insider discussions among top Obama officials about Russia's much-debated role in the 2016 US elections. Although many of the documents are highly redacted or completely blacked out, they show conversations among favorite Trump targets including former intel chief James Clapper, as officials debated how to describe Russian election activity. The documents found that there was 'no indication of a Russian threat to directly manipulate the actual vote count through cyber means'. But Gabbard says the documents show that Democrats chose to ignore that - or even promote the opposite narrative - to try and take down Trump. 'Their egregious abuse of power and blatant rejection of our Constitution threatens the very foundation and integrity of our democratic republic,' Gabbard in a blistering statement accompanying the document release. 'No matter how powerful, every person involved in this conspiracy must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, to ensure nothing like this ever happens again.' Several of the documents put out by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) show officials found that Russia either wouldn't try or wouldn't be able to shift the outcome of a US vote. 'Russia probably is not trying to going to be able to? [influence] the election by using cyber means to manipulate computer-enabled election infrastructure,' reads one draft line by the then-deputy director of ODNI. Documents show officials crafting a document saying there wasn't an indication Russia could manipulate the vote count The administration unsealed the documents amid the fury over the Jeffrey Epstein files By December 9, following Trump's stunning win over Democrat Hillary Clinton, a document to top intelligence officials tasked them with creating an assessment 'per the President's request' about 'tools Moscow used and actions it took to influence the 2016 election' 'We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election,' according to a January 2017 report titled 'Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections.' The report then mentioned Russian cyber operations against both political parties. Of the material Gabbard released, one new August 31, 2016 document by an official with their name blacked out states that the 'thrust of the analysis is that there is no indication of a Russian threat to directly manipulate the actual vote count through cyber means.' Democrats have responded by claiming that Gabbard's declassification is designed to deflect from the Department of Justice's decision to close its investigation into the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. In response Trump has instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to disclose grand jury testimony files, pending court approval.
Times
5 hours ago
- Times
UK companies face record profit warnings amid geopolitical tensions
UK listed companies have issued a record level of warnings over geopolitical tensions as they face higher trade costs under the Trump administration. The number of profit warnings issued by public companies rose by 20 per cent to 59 in the second quarter of 2025, according to research from EY, as concerns over international affairs mounted on businesses. Government policy changes and geopolitical uncertainties were cited as a leading factor behind 46 per cent of warnings to investors, up from 4 per cent in the second quarter of 2024. EY stated this was the highest percentage recorded for companies citing geopolitical issues in more than 25 years of its reporting on profit warnings. There was a notable uplift in profit warnings after the United States threatened to impose wide-ranging tariffs on imports in April. The number of such warnings rose by 24 per cent year-on-year to 26 in April, with half of those companies blaming tariff threats and US economic disruption for their financial difficulties.
