On July 24, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order titled, "Saving College Sports," aimed at preserving athletic opportunities and preventing college athletes from being classified as professional employees. The order directs his Cabinet to develop a plan within 30 days to achieve these goals.
Key Highlights of the Executive Order
- Scholarship Guidelines for Based on Revenue: Schools with athletic department annual revenues over $125 million must increase scholarships for non-revenue sports. Those earning at least $50 million must maintain existing scholarship levels.
- Ban on Pay-for-Play: The order prohibits "third-party, pay-for-play payments" that function as direct compensation for athletic performance, while still allowing fair-market Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) deals.
- Federal Oversight: The Secretary of Education is empowered to ensure federal funding to ensure schools comply with these policies.
The NIL Debate and NCAA Challenges
The NCAA has long banned direct "pay-for-play," but the rise of NIL deals has complicated enforcement efforts While these deals were intended to reward athletes for legitimate endorsements, critics argue they’ve become de facto salaries, undermining the NCAA’s ability to reinforce its rues.
Legal and Legislative Challenges to Amateurism
The NCAA's long-standing model has been significantly weakened by a series of legal challenges and state laws. While the House v. NCAA is seen by many as a win for athletes, it also further blurred the lines between amateur and professional.
President’s Trump’s new executive order has drawn criticism from some who argue that presidential intervention is unnecessary and detrimental to athletes' newfound ability to make their own deals.
However, NCAA President Charlie Baker and other college sports leaders contend that federal assistance is crucial to maintaining competitive balance. Following the House settlement, which was rooted in anti-trust claims, they’re calling on Congress to grant an antitrust exemption. They argue that without federal backing, it will be nearly impossible to enforce rules that protect competitive equity while allowing athletes to earn.
While the executive order itself cannot grant such an exemption, a bill granting broad antitrust leeway to the NCAA has passed through two House committees and could be up for a full vote in September.
The Employee Debate Intensifies
The executive order also addresses the question of whether college athletes should be classified as employees. It directs the Secretary of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board to clarify college athletes' employment status in a way that prioritizes educational benefits.
The question of whether college athletes should be classified as employees remains highly contentious. College sports leaders strongly oppose this classification. They fear that such a shift would financially cripple many athletic programs and argue that most athletes do not wish to be employees.
But the legal landscape is shifting. In the ongoing federal case, Johnson v. NCAA, plaintiffs argue that athletes should be considered employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Some football coaches are even advocating for this model, suggesting that treating athletes as employees, with structured salary caps, could bring more stability to the increasingly commercialized college sports system.
Given the complexity and potential long-term impacts of these developments, it may be wise to consult with an attorney experienced in sports law or NIL matters before making decisions related to contracts, eligibility, or employment status.
[View source.]
