College sports leaders shouldn't get too excited about Trump NIL executive order
And yet that was the case Wednesday after CBS reported the night before that Trump intended to sign one 'establishing national standards for the NCAA's Name, Image and Likeness program' in the coming days.
What does that mean exactly? People who are generally informed on the interplay between college sports and the federal government didn't seem to know an executive order was imminent or what exactly would be in it – even folks with a direct line to Trump and who have engaged with about potential federal action that would bail college sports out of its current dysfunction.
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
UPI
22 minutes ago
- UPI
Calif., Illinois may fight new Texas congressional maps with their own
1 of 2 | California Gov. Gavin Newsom says he may seek to change his state's congressional maps if Texas redraws its borders. File photo by Jonathan Alcorn/UPI | License Photo July 26 (UPI) -- As the Texas Legislature plans to redraw congressional maps in an effort to increase Republican members in the U.S. House, the governors of California and Illinois may devise their own new borders. Traditionally, the boundaries are changed every 10 years with the latest U.S. Census data but Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has called a special legislative session after pressure from the White House to preserve the GOP majority in the U.S. House. President Donald Trump believes an additional five seats could be created by changing the borders. Of the state's 38 districts, 25 are held by Republicans. Democrats hold seats in big cities of Austin, Dallas, El Paso, Fort Worth, Houston, Laredo, McAllen, San Antonio. Ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, Republicans hold a 219-212 advantage in the House with four vacancies -- three Democrats who died and one Republican who resigned this week. More than a dozen Texas House members flew to Illinois and California -- two blue states -- on Friday for a meeting with California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzkeper, during which they revealed their intentions. "Donald Trump called up Governor Abbott for one simple reason: to rig the 2026 elections. California's moral high ground means nothing if we're powerless because of it," Newsom said after meeting with Democrats from the Texas House. "This moment requires us to be prepared to fight fire with fire. Whether that's a special election, a ballot initiative, a bill, a fight in court. If they proceed in Texas, we will be ready." "This is not a bluff. This is real, and trust me, it's more real after listening to these leaders today, how existential this is," Newsom said. As the most populous state in the nation, California has 43 Democratic members of the house and nine Republican members, while Illinois is represented by 14 Democrats and three Republicans. "Everything is on the table," Pritzer said. The Illinois governor said he doesn't want to redraw the maps but "if they're going to take this drastic action, then we might also take drastic action to respond." "We want the country to understand [that] what's going on in Texas is a national battle," State Rep. Richard Pena Raymond, a Democrat from Laredo, said. Raymond told Pritzner that redistricting is "clearly aimed at affecting the entire country." Responsibility for determining Congressional district maps differs from state to state. In California, an independent commission approved by voters in 2010 works on the maps. Illinois maps, on the other hand, are put together by the state lawmakers have been drawn strongly to favor the Democrat Party in the state. Newsom said he is considering having a referendum to change the rules before the 2026 election, unless the Legislature comes up with another solution, which would take two-thirds of legislators voting in favor of. "We have to fight fire with fire," Newsom said. Other states Two other Democratic governors are considering new maps -- Phil Murphy in New Jersey and Kathy Hochul in New York. "There's other states that are violating the rules," Hochul said during a news conference on Thursday. "I'm going to look at it closely with Hakeem Jeffries," a New York member of the House, as well has House minority leader. In New York, Democrats have a 19-7 advantage as a result of their districting maps. "It's deplorable," Murphy said during an interview at the summer meeting of the bipartisan National Governors Association in Colorado Springs. "If they're going to play these games, we're going to have to be just as aggressive. We can't bring a knife to a gunfight." Democrats hold nine of the 12 seats in New Jersey. In Florida, the state Supreme Court on July 17 upheld its newest congressional map. He said he believes the state had been "malappropriated" and redistricting "would be appropriate" in a few years. Florida's congressional delegation is controlled by Republicans, 20-8. In Ohio, legislators are required to redraw maps before 2026. The GOP has 10 of the 15 seats. Colorado Gov. Jared Polis is against redistricting more frequently. The state's maps are overseen by an independent commission and it's eight U.S. House seats are evenly split 4-4. Texas situation Texas last redrew its borders in mid-cycle in 2003 after the GOP gained control of both chambers for the first time since Reconstruction. In Texas, Abbott noted a July 7 letter from the Justice Department that said majority Black and Hispanic districts in Dallas need to be redrawn based on a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit last year. The DOJ said those districts are "unconstitutional racial gerrymanders," but Abbott argued the opposite in 2021. In federal court in El Paso, he argued race had not been taken into account there. "We are no longer compelled to have coalition districts," Abbott said in an interview with KDFW in Dallas. U.S. Rep. Joaquin Castro, a San Antonio Democrat, appeared at a state House hearing. "That's what's at stake here, whether you all are going to work for the people of Texas, as we used to do, to try to do, or whether you take your commandments from Donald Trump and the White House," Castro said. "I hope that you all will choose to do the business of the people of Texas, as this body has a history of being independent from the federal government."
Politico
22 minutes ago
- Politico
Democrats desperately look for a redistricting edge in California, New York and Maryland
Hochul's political allies believe there is little upside to drawing new lines. 'I understand those in New York who are watching what's happening in Texas and Ohio want to offset their unfair advantage,' said New York Democratic Chair Jay Jacobs. But 'the constitution seems pretty clear that this redistricting process should be done every 10 years. I don't know where someone could interpret it as something you can do every two years.' Beyond Texas, Republicans have their eye on picking up seats in other states like Missouri and Florida — which would put Democrats in a tough spot, given they don't have as much leeway to squeeze out extra seats. New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy was noncommittal when asked by reporters earlier this week if he plans to pursue redistricting, noting that it's 'too early to make any definitive statement about it.' But he echoed what many other Democrats across the country have said when talking about the possibility of early redistricting: 'Never bring a knife to a gunfight.' New Jersey has its own constitutional impediment, which states that congressional districts, which are drawn by an independent commission, 'shall remain unaltered through the next year ending in zero in which a federal census for this State is taken.' Even if they were able to circumvent the state constitution, Democrats already have the majority in the New Jersey congressional delegation, and just two seats — the 7th, held by Republican Rep. Tom Kean Jr., and the 9th, held by Democratic Rep. Nellie Pou — are considered battlegrounds. Even some other Hail Mary options seem off the table. State lawmakers in Washington, Minnesota and Colorado balked at the suggestion they should pursue drawing new maps in the next few months. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, accompanied by several members of the Texas state Legislature, calls for a new way for California to redraw it's voting districts during a news conference In Sacramento, Calif., Friday July 25, 2025. | Rich Pedroncelli/AP 'It's just not in the cards,' said Washington House Majority Leader Joe Fitzgibbon, citing the requirement that a two-thirds majority is needed in both the state House and Senate to reconvene the state's bipartisan redistricting commission. And Minnesota State Sen. Aric Nesbitt shut down the idea quickly: 'We're not power-crats, we're Democrats. We should do things that improve democracy, even if that means sometimes we don't get our way.' Democrats hold the governorship and state Senate in Minnesota, but Republicans narrowly control the House.
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘There has to be a better way': CA Senator Alex Padilla to introduce immigration reform legislation
(INSIDE CALIFORNIA POLITICS) — California Senator Alex Padilla will introduce legislation on Monday that would provide a pathway to citizenship for millions of undocumented immigrants. The bill, dubbed 'Renewing Immigration Provisions of the Immigration Act of 1929,' would provide access to lawful permanent resident status by advancing the date for eligibility under immigration registry. Immigration registry is an existing process that allows individuals to apply for permanent resident status on the basis of their long-term residency in the U.S. In order to qualify, individuals must have entered the country on or before a specified date and must demonstrate good moral character and continuous residence since their entry. After its creation in 1929, Congress advanced the registry date four times, most recently in 1986, when the date was set at January 1, 1972. Only non-citizens who entered the United States by that date are eligible to apply for permanent resident status through registry. The date is now so far in the past that few individuals are eligible. Padilla's bill would: Update the outdated 'Registry' cutoff date so that long-term residents may qualify for lawful permanent resident status if they have lived in the U.S. continuously for at least seven years prior to filing an application under the Registry Preempt the need for further congressional action by making the Registry eligibility cutoff rolling, instead of tying it to a specific date, as it is now Provide a pathway to a green card for Dreamers, TPS holders and other forcibly displaced individuals, and highly skilled members of the workforce, such as H-1B visa holders, who have been waiting years for a visa number to become available Padilla's announcement comes as new polls show growing frustration over President Donald Trump's mass deportation effort and just one month after he was forcibly removed from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's press conference. 'It's not just the general public that has seen the cruelty and the overreach of Trump's deportation agenda,' Padilla said. 'The public opinion polls out there show that the vast majority of the American people see it for what it is and they support immigration. They know that it's a good thing and that not just DREAMers and farmworkers, but so many others deserve that pathway to legalization and potentially, eventually citizenship.' Padilla spoke to Inside California Politics host Nikki Laurenzo about the legislation and its likelihood of advancing in the Senate. Padilla said he has not secured support from any of his republican colleagues. 'Look, it may be tough. It certainly will be a lot of work, but I think the time is now,' Padilla said. 'Not a day has gone by since I've been in the Senate that I'm not talking to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle about the need to modernize our immigration system. And I point to California as an example. We're the fourth largest economy in the world, not despite our diverse and immigrant communities in California, but because of their contributions as workers, as consumers, as entrepreneurs.' Padilla says his proposal is based on a simple principle: if you've built a life here, you deserve a chance to stay. 'Let me be clear, if they truly were only focusing on dangerous, violent criminals, as Donald Trump likes to say repeatedly, there would be no debate, there would be no discussion,' Padilla said. 'But what we are seeing on a daily basis is the reality that the majority of the people being arrested, being detained, being deported have no violent criminal history.' Padilla also weighed in on whether former Vice President Kamala Harris should run for California governor in 2026. Inside California Politics airs this weekend during the following times: KTLA: Sunday, July 27 at 5:30 Saturday, July 26 at 6:30 Saturday, July 26 at 6:30 p.m. and Sunday, July 27 at 8:30 Sunday, July 27 at 5:30 a.m. and 11:00 Sunday, July 27 at 8:30 Saturday, July 26 at 11:00 p.m. and Sunday, July 27 at 7:30 a.m. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
