U.S. Election results are coming to a close this week as it’s now clear that the Republican party will hold their control of the House of Representatives. This, combined with the re-election of Donald Trump as president and the flip of the Senate means that Republicans will control the White House and both chambers of Congress for the first time since 2018. Since then, the NCAA has changed drastically thanks to a number of antitrust lawsuits in favor of athletes profiting from their name, image, and likeness (NIL).
How will a Republican-controlled government affect the NCAA and its athletes in light of these changes?
There are several possibilities, but perhaps the most concrete and likely change has to do with the codification of House v. NCAA.
The NCAA, who stands to lose money if they have to pay their athletes, previously wanted a codified antitrust exemption from congress when it comes to college athletes.
As cases such as House v. NCAA have gotten further in their settlement processes, the NCAA’s desire has shifted. Now, the primary ask is for the settlement of House to be codified in law. This would help prevent the NCAA and its schools from having to pay more further down the line. Some athletes are already saying that the anticipated $2.8 billion back payment settlement doesn’t go far enough.
Politicians disagree down the partisan line of whether to codify or not. Generally speaking, conservative politicians support keeping student-athletes’ amateur status, while the liberal politicians support student-athletes getting employee status. Extra Points writer Matt Brown said that athletic directors told him that a Republican-controlled government would be better for business in the short term.
One of the most vocal politicians about the matter has been conservative Texas senator Ted Cruz. Well before the elections, Cruz has been outspoken in favor of an antitrust exemption, as he believes this will protect the value and business model of college sports. He also said we will make college sports “a very, very high priority” as a ranked member of the senate’s commerce committee, the committee where an exemption such as this one would originate.
Because Republicans now control the senate with South Dakota senator John Thune as majority leader, Cruz is poised to step into the head leadership position of the committee in January. With a vocal opponent of student-athlete employment status leading the committee and a conservative majority in all three branches of federal government, a House codification looks more likely than ever.
Apart from the codification, there has been talk about Title IX. President elect Donald Trump has expressed interest in shutting down the Department of Education. This department oversees Title IX compliance, both generally and in the enforcement of the antitrust lawsuit results. Trump would need congressional approval to shut down a federal agency. A proposal by his administration during his first presidency to merge the Department of Education with the Department of Labor did not go anywhere.
Probably not much, they’re more concerned with making sure professors aren’t allowed to teach history like railroad and coal companies purposefully fanning the flames of racial tensions to divide labor organization.
Remember the whiterose
They’ve got bigger problems. Wars and deficits need the most attention
Here’s one of the sweetest ironies of Trump’s re-election earlier in the month.
Remember back to 2017 when LA and Paris were competing for the 2024 Olympic Games? The IOC decided to give it to both cities, Paris in ‘24 and LA in ‘28. There were several reasons for which city got which date, but among them was IOC’s thinking that if Trump were re-elected in 2020 then giving it to LA in ‘28 would prevent him from presiding over the opening ceremony of the ‘24 games in the US.
I highly doubt this, monkey likes the number 100 I don’t think its that deep.
Regardless of anyone’s personal feelings about Trump, that man will be 82 by the LA Games, and he has done some hard living in his lifetime.
I’m not saying he’s definitely not going to make it, but I think the odds of him still being president by the opening ceremony are 50/50 at best, right? Seems much more likely to me that JD Vance opens the Games.
i hope the discussions in these comments are civil and actually constructive with some forward thinking LOL
I do hope something is done about the ongoing travesty of males competing in women’s sports. It would be a small silver lining in a very dark cloud.
yea because its such an issue in the overall scope of American sports, right? Please.
“Ongoing travesty” bro it happened like twice at any level that matters. Chill tf out.
Any level that matters huh. So I guess it doesn’t matter to the high school girls in CT getting crushed in track. Doesn’t matter to the volleyball players getting 80 mph spikes hit into their face causing injuries,
It matters at every level!
Yeah, all 3 trans athletes in the NCAA are a huge problem that needs to take precedence.
About what percentage of athletes is that? The politicians who stoke those types of inflammatory topics rather than tackling issues that affect the majority of Americans are just that, politicians.
I could 100% see the America-first mindset of this administration being applied to make athletic scholarships harder (or impossible) to obtain by international students, seems to fit seamlessly within their values.
That could be true unless they come from Europe.
It will come down to how far down the docket this administration can get in one term. They have a lot of really, really big agenda items to tackle, and the implementation of those agenda items is going to take a lot of time – especially if Musk et al do to government workers what they’ve promised to do (terminate a ton of them, require others to come back to the office, etc.).
The most likely way for that to happen, IMO, is if they reach a deal with the NCAA that is something to the effect of: “We will provide legislative protection for anti-trust issues if you make it harder for international student athletes to come to the NCAA.”… Read more »
In the swimming context, lots of D1 teams have international athletes, and that is especially so at the D2 level. If international scholarships are limited, what teams would be most affected? Is swimming the sport that has the most international athletes?
This is hardly an issue in football and basketball, so lawmakers wouldn’t really be looking beyond that at how that would affects the other sports.
NCAA soccer, both men’s and women’s, also has a lot of internationals. But the same principle applies. It’s not football or basketball, so lawmakers probably won’t care all that much.
On the men’s side I think soccer would have the most, less so on the women’s, the US simply doesn’t have the numbers playing the rest of the world does. Field hockey for both genders also probably very international, the US isn’t great on a global level.
NCAA D1 XC has an issue with 24-28 year old East African professional runners coming in as “Freshmen.”
I don’t mind foreign athletes, but I do think something like that is somewhat alarming from a competitive standpoint. If it’s an 18 year old East African, no issue what so ever. The age of the incoming “freshmen” is a sad joke.
I think there needs to be an age cap of some sort on college athletics.
Please list 5 current 28 year old Division 1 freshmen in any sport that did not have past military requirements