Democrats criticize latest effort by Congress to regulate college sports as setback for athletes
WASHINGTON — The latest effort by Congress to regulate college sports generated predictable partisan outrage on Thursday, with Democrats saying Republican-led draft legislation would claw back freedoms won by athletes through years of litigation against the NCAA.
Three House committees are considering legislation that would create a national standard for name, image and likeness payments to athletes and protect the NCAA against future lawsuits. Last week, a federal judge approved a $2.8 billion settlement that will lead to schools paying athletes directly, and NCAA President Charlie Baker said now that his organization is implementing those major changes, Congress needs to step in and stabilize college sports.
Baker said he supports the draft legislation that was the subject of Thursday's hearing by a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee, but there was little indication that any bill advanced by the House would generate enough Democratic support to surpass the 60-vote threshold in the Senate.
'I'm deeply disappointed for the second year in a row, Republicans on this committee are advancing a partisan college sports bill that protects the power brokers of college athletics at the expense of the athletes themselves,' said Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass.
Trahan noted that if the NCAA or conferences establish unfair rules, athletes can challenge them in court, with the settlement of the House v. NCAA antitrust case the latest example of athletes winning rights that they had been denied historically.
'This bill rewrites that process to guarantee the people in power always win, and the athletes who fuel this multibillion-dollar industry always lose,' said Trahan, who played volleyball at Georgetown.
The NCAA argues that it needs a limited antitrust exemption in order to set its own rules and preserve a college sports system that provides billions of dollars in scholarships and helps train future U.S. Olympians. Several athletes are suing the NCAA over its rule that athletes are only eligible to play four seasons in a five-year period, and on Tuesday, a group of female athletes filed an appeal of the House settlement, saying it discriminated against women in violation of federal law.
On the Senate side, a bipartisan group including Republican Ted Cruz of Texas has been negotiating a college sports reform bill for months, but those talks are moving more slowly than Cruz had hoped at the beginning of this Congress.
The draft bill in the House would create a national standard for NIL, overriding the state laws that critics say have led to a chaotic recruiting environment. That, too, was criticized by Democrats and by their key witness at the hearing, Ramogi Huma, executive director of the National College Players Association.
Huma argued that the NCAA wants to get rid of booster-funded NIL collectives that another witness, Southeastern Conference associate commissioner William King, characterized as 'fake NIL' or 'pay for play.'
Instead, Huma said the collectives are examples of the free market at work, noting that before players won NIL rights through a court case, boosters could only donate to athletic departments.
Tom McMillen, a former Democratic congressman who played in the NBA after an All-America basketball career at Maryland, took a dim view of the bill's prospects.
'I think they're trying to come up with something and pull in some Democrats. I just don't know if that's going to succeed or not,' said McMillen, who for several years led an association of Division I athletic directors. 'There's a real philosophical divide, so that's the hard part. It's hard to bridge. And there's a zillion other issues.'
The subcommittee chairman, Rep. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., said the draft legislation already had some bipartisan support and he was open to changes that would get more Democrats on board.
'I will consider some of the suggestions, the legitimate suggestions that were made,' Bilirakis said, 'and I will be happy to talk to lawmakers that truly want to get a big bill across the finish line.'
___
AP college sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump tells Iran to make deal or face 'more brutal' attacks
US President Donald Trump urged Iran Friday to make a deal or face "even more brutal" attacks, while keeping the door open for negotiations after Israel's deadly strikes on Tehran's nuclear facilities. Trump appeared to be sitting on the fence, a day after having publicly told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to hold off striking Iran only to see the key US ally go ahead anyway. The operation killed senior figures -- among them the armed forces chief and top nuclear scientists -- and Iran has called Israel's wave of strikes a "declaration of war." "There has already been great death and destruction, but there is still time to make this slaughter, with the next already planned attacks being even more brutal, come to an end," Trump said on his Truth Social platform. "Iran must make a deal, before there is nothing left... JUST DO IT, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE," he said. Trump said that he "gave Iran chance after chance to make a deal." He added that Israel -- which Trump has closely aligned with since his return to the White House -- has a lot of weapons thanks to the United States and "they know how to use it." Trump was attending a National Security Council meeting Friday in the White House Situation Room. - 'It's been excellent' - But Trump later appeared to be making a political calculation about how best to respond to Israel's attack. Less than a day earlier Trump had called on Israel to hold off an attack to make room for diplomacy, only for the key US ally to hit Iran as Trump was holding a picnic at the White House for members of Congress. By Friday morning, however, Trump was calling the Israeli offensive "excellent" during a round of phone calls with US media. "I think it's been excellent," ABC News quoted him as saying. "And there's more to come. A lot more." Trump also gave mixed signals about the extent of US involvement. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had said Thursday that the United States was "not involved" in the strikes and warned Iran not to retaliate against any US forces in the region. Trump, however, said on Truth Social on Friday that Israel had acted because a 60-day deadline that he had set for Iran had run out, implying that the two acted in concert. His boasts about the "finest" US equipment that Israel had used -- a day before a huge parade in Washington on Trump's 79th birthday featuring US aircraft and tanks -- also muddied the waters. Trump earlier told Fox News he had been made aware of the Israeli strikes before they happened, and stressed that Tehran "cannot have a nuclear bomb." But at the same time Trump said Iran could have a second chance to negotiate. "They missed the opportunity to make a deal. Now, they may have another opportunity. We'll see," Trump told NBC. Trump also indicated that the Iranians were "calling me to speak" after the attacks to suggest they wanted to make a deal, without offering specifics. During Trump's first term, he pulled the United States out of a landmark agreement to relieve sanctions on Iran in return for curbs on its nuclear program. The United States and Iran have had several rounds of talks since Trump returned to the White House, but after initially striking an optimistic tone, they have foundered in recent days. dk/ksb/md
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kilmar Abrego Garcia pleads not guilty to human smuggling charges in Tennessee federal court
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose mistaken deportation has become a flashpoint in President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown, pleaded not guilty on Friday to human smuggling charges in a federal court in Tennessee. The plea was the first chance the Maryland construction worker has had in a U.S. courtroom to answer the Trump administration's allegations against him since he was mistakenly deported in March to a notorious prison in El Salvador. The Republican administration returned Abrego Garcia to the U.S. last week to face criminal charges related to what it said was a human smuggling operation that transported immigrants across the country. The charges stem from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee during which Abrego Garcia was driving a vehicle with nine passengers. His lawyers have called the allegations 'preposterous.' Friday's hearing will also focus on whether Abrego Garcia should be released from jail while awaiting trial on the smuggling charges. A federal judge will hear arguments from Abrego Garcia's lawyers and attorneys for the U.S. government. Before the hearing began in Nashville, Abrego Garcia's wife told a crowd outside a church that Thursday marked three months since the Trump administration 'abducted and disappeared my husband and separated him from our family.' Her voice choked with emotion, Jennifer Vasquez Sura said she saw her husband for the first time on Thursday. She said, 'Kilmar wants you to have faith,' and asked the people supporting him and his family ''to continue fighting, and I will be victorious because God is with us.'' Abrego Garcia is a citizen of El Salvador who had been living in the United States for more than a decade before he was wrongfully deported by the Trump administration. The expulsion violated a 2019 U.S. immigration judge's order that shielded him from deportation to his native country because he likely faced gang persecution there. While the Trump administration described the mistaken removal as 'an administrative error,' officials have continued to justify it by insisting Abrego Garcia was a member of the MS-13 gang. His wife and attorneys have denied the allegations, saying he's simply a construction worker and family man. U.S. attorneys have asked U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes to keep Abrego Garcia in jail, describing him as a danger to the community and a flight risk. Abrego Garcia's attorneys disagree, pointing out he was already wrongly detained in a notorious Salvadoran prison thanks to government error and arguing due process and 'basic fairness' require him to be set free. The charges against Abrego Garcia are human smuggling. But in their request to keep Abrego Garcia in jail, U.S. attorneys also accuse him of trafficking drugs and firearms and of abusing the women he transported, among other claims, although he is not charged with such crimes. The U.S. attorneys also accuse Abrego Garcia of taking part in a murder in El Salvador. However, none of those allegations is part of the charges against him, and at his initial appearance June 6, the judge warned prosecutors she cannot detain someone based solely on allegations. One of Abrego Garcia's attorneys last week characterized the claims as a desperate attempt by the Trump administration to justify the mistaken deportation three months after the fact. 'There's no way a jury is going to see the evidence and agree that this sheet metal worker is the leader of an international MS-13 smuggling conspiracy,' private attorney Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg said. In a Wednesday court filing, Abrego Garcia's public defenders argued the government is not even entitled to a detention hearing — much less detention — because the charges against him aren't serious enough. Although the maximum sentence for smuggling one person is 10 years, and Abrego Garcia is accused of transporting hundreds of people over nearly a decade, his defense attorneys point out there's no minimum sentence. The average sentence for human smuggling in 2024 was just 15 months, according to court filings. The decision to charge Abrego Garcia criminally prompted the resignation of Ben Schrader, who was chief of the criminal division at the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Tennessee. He posted about his departure on social media on the day of the indictment, writing, 'It has been an incredible privilege to serve as a prosecutor with the Department of Justice, where the only job description I've ever known is to do the right thing, in the right way, for the right reasons.' He did not directly address the indictment and declined to comment when reached by The Associated Press. However, a person familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a personnel matter confirmed the connection. Although Abrego Garcia lives in Maryland, he's being charged in Tennessee based on a May 2022 traffic stop for speeding in the state. The Tennessee Highway Patrol body camera video of the encounter that was released to the public last month shows a calm exchange between officers and Abrego Garcia. It also shows the officers discussing among themselves their suspicions of human smuggling before sending him on his way. One of the officers says, 'He's hauling these people for money.' Another says Abrego Garcia had $1,400 in an envelope. Abrego Garcia was not charged with any offense at the traffic stop. Sandoval-Moshenberg, the private attorney, said in a statement after the video's release that he saw no evidence of a crime in the footage. Meanwhile, the lawsuit over Abrego Garcia's mistaken deportation isn't over. Abrego Garcia's attorneys have asked a federal judge in Maryland to impose fines against the Trump administration for contempt, arguing that it flagrantly ignored court orders forseveral weeks to return him. The Trump administration said it will ask the judge to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that it followed the judge's order to return him to the U.S. ___ This story has been corrected to show the Trump administration said that the human smuggling operation transported immigrants across the country, not that it brought immigrants into the country illegally. ___ Finley reported from Norfolk, Va.
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Second judge blocks parts of Trump order overhauling elections
A federal judge on Friday blocked the Trump administration from implementing parts of President Trump's executive order seeking to overhaul elections. U.S. District Judge Denise Casper granted a request from a group of Democratic attorneys general to halt five sections of the executive order, most focused on Trump's new requirements for proof of citizenship to register to vote in U.S. elections. Casper is the second judge to block portions of Trump's directive. A federal judge in Washington, D.C., granted a preliminary injunction in April in three consolidated cases, which also focused on the new proof of citizenship requirements. 'There is no dispute (nor could there be) that U.S. citizenship is required to vote in federal elections and the federal voter registration forms require attestation of citizenship,' wrote Casper, an appointee of former President Obama. 'The issue here is whether the President can require documentary proof of citizenship where the authority for election requirements is in the hands of Congress, its statutes … do not require it, and the statutorily created [Election Assistance Commission (EAC)] is required to go through a notice and comment period and consult with the States before implementing any changes to the federal forms for voter registration,' she continued. Casper enjoined the administration from implementing new rules mandating documentary proof of citizenship in federal voter registration forms. She also blocked conditioning any funding for states from the EAC — an independent election administration agency — on their adoption of a ballot receipt deadline of Election Day. She also blocked a directive to Attorney General Pam Bondi to take civil or criminal action against states that violate any provisions by counting absentee or mail-in ballots received after Election Day in the final tabulation of votes for president or members of Congress. The portions of the order relating to ballots received after Election Day apply to 13 of the 19 states that filed the challenge, she ruled. 'There is nothing in the text of the Election Day statutes that bars the Ballot Receipt States from counting ballots received in accordance with their ballot receipt laws or that provides for civil enforcement or criminal action by the Attorney General against the Ballot Receipt States,' the judge wrote in her 44-page opinion. Trump's executive order, signed in March, said it was his administration's policy to enforce federal law and 'to protect the integrity of our election process.' The president has repeatedly questioned the legitimacy of American elections, most notably the 2020 election won by former President Biden. 'The Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections,' Casper wrote. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
