Protect College Sports Act: Leaders Urge House to Pass Bill

A coalition of college athletics leaders is pushing for federal legislation, urging Congress to pass a bill that could reform rules governing student-athletes across the NCAA.

In a letter dated Oct. 28 that Front Office Sports obtained, Saving College Sports (SCS) asked House Speaker Mike Johnson and Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries to pass the Protect College Sports Act without amendments when lawmakers return in November.

SCS argues that the legislation would provide a national framework for college athletics, addressing athlete compensation, eligibility and the protection of women’s and Olympic sports.

What Would the Protect College Sports Act Change?

Under the proposal, federal standards would govern name, image and likeness (NIL) compensation and transfers, superseding conflicting state laws on academic requirements and eligibility timelines. Additional provisions include limited antitrust protections for enforcing certain rules, medical coverage and health and safety requirements for student-athletes, and a 5% cap on agents’ commissions for endorsement deals.

Its revenue-sharing framework would authorize additional funding for athlete retention and non-revenue sports, including women’s and Olympic programs. The bill would also permit a voluntary pooled media-rights arrangement.

SCS is pressing the House to act during the post-election session, describing it as a compromise shaped by lawmaker negotiations and input from colleges, conferences, and student-athletes.

The Senate passed the bill (77-22) on Sept. 28. The House is not expected to consider the measure before the Nov. 3 midterm elections and is scheduled to return Nov. 9, leaving its path forward uncertain.

What Could It Mean for Division III?

The bill’s specific implications for D3 athletics remain uncertain.

Division III operates under a distinct model that prohibits athletics-based financial aid, while student-athletes can pursue legitimate NIL opportunities. The legislation addresses eligibility, compensation and athlete welfare, but its passage would not automatically establish that every provision applies identically across all three NCAA divisions.

The letter doesn’t explain how the proposed legislation would affect Division III programs or whether they would need to adjust their existing rules.

The House’s next steps will determine whether the measure advances to President Donald Trump for consideration. Until then, the scope of any potential changes to Division III remains unclear.