Trump urges Congress to pass Protect College Sports Act as Senate approves bill

President Donald Trump called on Congress on September 28 to pass the Protect College Sports Act, seeking federal rules for college athletics as lawmakers debated athlete payments, transfers and eligibility. The White House issued its appeal before the Senate's final vote that evening. The Senate later passed the bill 77-22, sending the debate to the House. For athletes and schools, the proposal would set nationwide rules for name, image and likeness deals while changing how sports bodies regulate competition.

The White House said years of litigation and uncertainty over name, image and likeness, eligibility, transfers and revenue sharing had left college sports without consistent rules. It urged Congress to put the legislation on Trump's desk, arguing that scholarships, roster places and women's and Olympic sports were at stake. Those are the administration's stated concerns, not established outcomes of the bill. The release also pointed to Trump's earlier executive orders and White House discussions with sports figures.

The September 28 appeal was published at 21:41 UTC. The Senate recorded final passage at 9:42 p.m. Eastern that day, or 01:42 UTC on September 29. Associated Press separately reported that Trump praised the legislation after the Senate vote, saying it would save college sports and colleges. That later reaction is distinct from the White House release. NewsJaws previously reported the Senate's passage of the measure; the administration's appeal adds its public case for congressional action.

What the Senate bill would change for college athletes

The Senate-approved text would protect athletes' ability to market and earn money from their name, image and likeness and to enter qualifying agreements. It would generally prevent colleges, conferences and athletic associations from penalizing an athlete's eligibility or scholarship solely because of such a deal. The text also requires individual consent when a group of athletes' identities is used to promote a product or service. These provisions sit alongside proposed disclosures and an agreement database.

Revenue sharing is another central issue. Associated Press reported that the Senate-passed bill would build on the House v. NCAA settlement framework, under which schools could share about $21.5 million with athletes, and allow a retention fund of up to $27.5 million for some schools. The Congressional Budget Office described the settlement as a 10-year revenue-sharing arrangement and a $2.8 billion payment to some former athletes. Its analysis addressed an earlier committee-reported bill, so the Senate-approved text governs the current proposal.

Revenue sharing and other protections in the bill

The bill contains protections and obligations beyond athlete pay. Associated Press and the budget office describe provisions covering agent fees, scholarships, health insurance, minimum sports and roster opportunities, and an office of the student-athlete ombudsman. The Senate text also addresses broadcasting arrangements: schools and conferences could pool media rights under conditions set by the legislation. Those provisions matter to athletes across programs with very different media revenue.

Associated Press reported that the final Senate measure included an amendment making it easier for athletes to sue over sexual assault and a requirement to disclose foreign financing in college athletics. The Senate rejected amendments that would have capped coaches' salaries or limited ticket-price increases. The bill also addresses midseason football coaching moves and conference structure, including a three-year independent period for schools switching conferences and a 20-program ceiling for conferences, according to AP.

Supporters argue that federal legislation could reduce litigation and create more predictable rules. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz said Congress alone could repair the legal framework, according to Associated Press. Critics, including Senator Chris Murphy, argue that the proposal gives the NCAA broad authority while limiting athletes' compensation and leaving coaches' pay unrestricted. AP also reported objections from civil-rights and labor groups over the treatment of athlete employment and collective bargaining. These are competing assessments of a proposal whose effects remain untested.

Why the House path remains uncertain

House action is the next legislative hurdle. Associated Press reported uncertainty over the bill's path there: the chamber had struggled to advance a different college-sports proposal, and some Republicans wanted an explicit declaration that athletes are not employees. The Senate text leaves employment status unresolved. AP reported that the House was expected to return in mid-November after the elections, but that schedule does not establish when it might consider this measure. Until both chambers approve legislation and it is enacted, the Senate vote changes no federal law.