The U.S. Senate passed a sweeping overhaul of college sports on Monday night, approving the Protect College Sports Act by a lopsided 77-22 margin in a rare bipartisan coalition that cut across the chamber’s usual divides.
The bill, spearheaded by Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz and Washington Democratic Sen. Maria Cantwell, would more than double the cap on direct payments to student-athletes, impose new limits on transfers and agent fees, and leave state bans on men competing in women’s sports untouched, according to The Daily Wire.
“College sports were headed off a cliff: endless lawsuits, no rules, and women’s and Olympic sports on the chopping block,” Cruz said on X after the vote. “Tonight, 77 Senators said enough. … Now, it goes to the House. Let’s get this to President Trump’s desk before Election Day, on the set of College Gameday.”
What the bill would actually do
The most eye-catching provision concerns money. If enacted, the cap on direct athlete pay would jump from roughly $21 million per school β the ceiling set by recent court settlements β to $48 million. About $22.5 million of that is earmarked as a retention fund for existing stars, while $5 million is set aside specifically for women’s and Olympic sports programs.
The legislation would hand the NCAA something it has sought for years: an antitrust exemption. According to Yahoo Sports, the exemption would let the governing body limit athlete movement to a single transfer without penalty, standardize a five-year eligibility policy, enforce the new revenue-share cap, and establish an agent registry with a maximum 5% fee.
Third-party name, image and likeness deals would remain legal, but any contract over $600 would have to be submitted to a new public database β an attempt to stop boosters from routing around salary limits through inflated marketing agreements.
The bill also includes what college football watchers have dubbed the “Lane Kiffin Rule.” Under it, head coaches and top coordinators who leave one FBS program for another during the same season would be barred from calling plays for their new team, or face a one-year suspension.
Eligibility would be capped at five years within a five-year window, effectively ending college careers for athletes over 24. The 5% agent endorsement commission cap is written into the text as well.
Athletes would also gain a set of protections that extend beyond their playing days: guaranteed scholarship support for ten years after eligibility ends so they can finish their degrees, a prohibition on athletic staff pressuring players over course or major selection, and a requirement that Division I schools cover out-of-pocket medical costs for sports-related injuries for five years after an athlete’s final competition.
Notably, the bill leaves in place state-level bans on trans-identifying male athletes in women’s sports β a priority for many of the bill’s Republican supporters and a flashpoint for its critics.
Opposition from women’s sports activists
The antitrust exemption has drawn sharp criticism from a coalition that includes prominent women’s sports advocates, who argue the NCAA cannot be trusted with expanded regulatory authority over eligibility.
Those concerns were amplified by a recent federal court ruling. U.S. District Judge Tiffany R. Johnson, appointed in 2024 by then-President Joe Biden, dismissed a case brought by former NCAA swimmer Riley Gaines. In Gaines v. NCAA, plaintiffs argued the NCAA should be held accountable for allowing biological men to compete in women’s events and enter women’s locker rooms. Judge Johnson accepted the NCAA’s position that it was not bound by Title IX to prevent that.
“The NCAA’s refusal to recognize its responsibility to uphold women’s rights means the NCAA cannot be trusted to regulate anyone’s sports β men’s or women’s,” said Marshi Smith, a former NCAA swimmer and co-founder of the Independent Council on Women’s Sports. “The NCAA cannot be trusted to receive broad new powers that it will only use to inflict further harm upon women.”
A narrow path in the House
The bill’s future now rests in the House, where the calendar is tight and the politics are more complicated. Members are not scheduled to return until November 9, after the midterm elections.
The Congressional Black Caucus has publicly opposed the measure, and Freedom Caucus members are expected to raise their own objections. Any changes the House makes would need to be sent back to the Senate for another vote, further compressing an already tight timeline.
The House has until January 3 to sign off on the bill. If it does not, the legislation dies β and with it, for now, the most significant federal intervention in college sports in decades.
Source: www.dailywire.com β https://www.dailywire.com/news/college-sports-just-got-its-biggest-washington-shakeup-yet