The Protect College Sports Act would legislate student-athlete pay, transfers between schools, and eligibility to play into federal law. It would also add new academic, medical, and reporting obligations for colleges.
For several years, college athletes’ right to earn endorsement money has been governed by a patchwork of state laws, NCAA rules, and most recently, a court settlement. A bipartisan bill that has passed the Senate would replace much of that patchwork with a single federal standard.
The Protect College Sports Act—proposed to establish nationwide rules around student-athlete compensation, scholarship guarantees, health and safety standards, women’s and Olympic sports protections, and broadcasting arrangements—was passed by the Senate in a 77-22 vote on Sept. 28. CBS Sports reported that no college sports overhaul had advanced that far in the Senate before. The bill’s authors are Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.), and Chris Coons (D-Del.). It now awaits action in the House. If the House does not act before the current Congress ends in January, the bill would have to start over.
The backers point to mounting financial strain on colleges. A September 2025 report from Cantwell’s staff found that Division I schools had cut 41 Olympic sports programs since May 2024, affecting at least 1,000 athletes.
“Colleges, large and small, have reached a breaking point,” Schmitt said in March, when he and Cantwell unveiled the media rights proposal that was later folded into the bill. “The current environment of runaway deals, facility arms races, and skyrocketing coaching salaries has put pressure on the entire system.”
The bill would guarantee athletes the right to profit from their name, image and likeness (NIL). It would also bar states from setting their own rules on NIL pay, transfers, or eligibility. Athletes would get five years to compete, beginning either when they first enroll full time or in the academic year after they turn 19, whichever comes first. They could transfer once without penalty, but a second transfer would generally cost a year of competition. Agents’ fees on endorsement deals would be capped at 5%.
Much of the bill would land on the academic side of campus. Athletics staff could not pressure athletes over their choice of courses or majors. Colleges could not cut a scholarship because of performance, injury, or roster decisions. Division I schools would have to welcome back former scholarship athletes who left without a degree within the past decade, with the same aid they had before.
Colleges would also have to cover athletes’ out-of-pocket costs for sports injuries, both while they play and for five years after. Each school would need a health and safety officer who reports to someone outside the athletic department. Annual reports would break down revenue, spending, athletes’ time commitments and academic outcomes by sport.
The bill also targets the wealthiest programs. Schools with at least $80 million in athletic revenue would have to keep scholarships and roster spots in sports that don’t profit at 2024-25 levels. Those would include women’s teams and Olympic sports such as swimming and track. A school seeking a hardship waiver would first have to cut coaching pay in its moneymaking sports by the same proportion. They also could not pay any coach more than $500,000 from sources other than athletics revenue or donations to the department.
The bill’s biggest financial lever is an exemption from antitrust law. It would allow colleges to voluntarily pool their broadcast rights and sell them jointly, much as NFL teams do. Supporters estimate the arrangement could generate $4 billion to $8 billion in new income. Every participating school would be guaranteed at least as much media revenue as in its best recent year.
The Commerce Committee says 32 NCAA conferences and more than 380 colleges support the bill. The Big Ten and Southeastern Conference, the two wealthiest, demanded changes before backing it. They argued that the media pooling provision and athletes’ broad new right to sue needed revisions.
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), a former SEC football coach, is also opposed.
“I think their bill goes too far,” Tuberville said on the Senate floor in June. “Unfortunately, it gets too deep into the businesses of universities, conferences, and athletics departments, while doing far too little to give the student-athlete the stability and clarity that, actually, they need.”
