3 senators (Booker, Moran, Blumenthal) are circulating a draft of a bill that would create national standards for NIL, and address a number of other issues. There could be several bills introduced on this issue. Will the NCAA see this as the cavalry riding to their rescue?
I think the SEC and Big Ten are supportive of it, as well as the cover that action from DC could give them in reining in some of this NIL stuff. I wouldn’t be surprised if it gains traction with the big two leagues pushing for it.
STEPHEN J. TRUOG
GO CATS!!! GEAUX SAINTS!!!
My concern with Congress addressing this issue is that they seldom stick to just the one issue, and it appears this draft is an example of that.
So the NCAA may find itself having to deal with a law that covers a whole lot more ground than NIL. Maybe that’s a good thing, we’ll see.
Of course any legislation needs to be cognizant of passing muster down the road with SCOTUS. The prohibition against college athletes earning NIL money was unanimously overturned, so any change in the court’s make up would unlikely affect an eventual decision
I remember reading through the Supreme Court decision that led to NIL, my layman’s knowledge of the law suggests that Congress has the authority to do things that the Supreme Court said the NCAA didn’t have.
The Supreme Court definitely hesitates if is there is a law passed by Congress and signed by he President.
Almost everything that has overturned recently were bureaucratic policies or executive actions not federal laws.
This could be the ideal time to pass legislation as congress is divided and neither side will get everything they want so it will be the minimum that everybody can general agree on. This is almost a football/basketball reps/senators vs. their non-sports counterparts.
A rare circumstance where Alabama might agree with Oregon while South Dakota might agree with Vermont…
Another issue that the Supreme Court has harped on is interpretations of executive authority that were either vague in the underlying law or explicitly prohibited in that law. The latter tends to lead to wider vote margins in Court decisions.
There are already some interesting cases teed up for the Court’s 2023-24 sitting.
The problem with Bi-Partisan bills is that they get loaded up with all kinds of Pork Barrel “additions.”
(for example - The American Legion, is chartered by Congress. They wanted to change eligibility to include the Cold War era vets, but Congress wouldn’t pass the legislation because of the politics of admitting we were at "war"with the Soviet Union. The Legion didn’t even bother to try to get it changed until they had a favorable Congress, and it was changed a couple of years ago.
BTW - if you were in the military for one day after Dec 7, 1941, you are now eligible for the American Legion. Contact me off line about how to join - WE NEED YOU.!!!)
Yes, I’m really certain that a punk former football head coach acting as a Senator from Bama Lama will do a serious NIL law. After all, someone who left Ole Miss for Auburn two days after saying something like , “They’ll have to take me out of here in a pine box,” or, skipped out on a restaurant meeting with Texas Tech recruits to become coach at Cincinnati has the high moral standing for such a law.
He’s definitely demonstrated how he deserved to be elected in other ways since he was “elected”.
If you want to start talking about the flaws of members of Congress, we may need 535 different topics to handle them all!
Numerous surveys over the years have shown that most Americans have a very dim view of Congress, but a more favorable view of their elected Representative and, usually, their Senators. That, plus the fact that they spend a lot of time fundraising, is the reason why incumbents are so hard to defeat. (We recently got a new Representative because the previous one had to resign due to a conviction related to fundraising, I’m still trying to figure out just what the new guy is doing for us.)