Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Executive Order on NIL Is a Symptom, Not a Cure, for College Sports Chaos

Opinion

Executive Order on NIL Is a Symptom, Not a Cure, for College Sports Chaos
running field during daytime

President Trump’s executive order of July 24th targeting college athletes’ NIL rights, depending on the yet to be determined specifics, will play heavily into the future of higher education, amateurism, and the civic role of sports in America.

The White House described the order as a response to an “out-of-control, rudderless system” and emphasized the need to “restore order” and preserve the educational and developmental benefits of college athletics


Framed as an effort to “restore integrity,” the order bans third-party pay-for-play inducements and directs federal agencies to clarify employment status and preserve non-revenue sports.

It’s a sweeping, symbolic, and steeped in cultural signaling, but it also sidesteps the core question:

What do we owe student-athletes, not just as economic actors, but as students, citizens, and future leaders?

College athletics today is a mass of contradictions.

Universities earn in billions while athletes juggle demanding schedules, limited academic protections, and, in recent years, the uncertain terrain of NIL deals.

Everyone agrees the present system is a mess, and many sports fans hope the Trump executive order adds some clarity. The current system is a mix of celebratory NIL stories, a transfer market resembling free agency, uneven access to legal counsel, and diminishing space for women’s and Olympic sports.

Trump’s order could lead to greater fairness, but depending on the specifics, it risks entrenching power imbalances. Provisions demanding scholarship maintenance could shield non-revenue sports. However, without clarity on enforcement, they may amount to little more than politics. For example, the directive to labor agencies hints at preserving amateurism does nothing to address systemic exploitation or the reality that some athletes are, functionally, full-time employees.

Congress is also entering the fray with several proposals that are a tug-of-war between bills that empower athletes and those that seek to preserve the traditional collegiate model. Some proposals aim to shield schools and the NCAA from lawsuits, while others push for unionization and collective bargaining rights. For example, the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee recently advanced the Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements (SCORE) Act that aims to

  • Codify student-athletes’ rights to earn from their NIL
  • Override the patchwork of state laws
  • Prohibit pay-for-play and predatory compensation schemes
  • Allow athletes to hire agents and receive financial literacy support

The Senate is taking a different approach with proposals by Sen. Chris Murphy, Sen.. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, who recently reintroduced the College Athlete Right to Organize Act. Additionally, Murphy revived the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act, which:

  • Establishes federal NIL rights
  • Protects international students’ visa status while engaging in NIL
  • Prohibits discrimination in NIL facilitation
  • Encourages revenue-sharing negotiations

The executive order and proposed Congressional actions, if ever passed, may be a great first step, but what is truly needed is a civic reckoning of what college sports can be.

Collegiate sports must evolve into a model that fosters not just performance, but participation. We need a system that treats athletes as multidimensional citizens and gives equal weight to education, equity, and empowerment. That means federal policy informed by athlete voices. It means transparency in NIL markets. And it means investing in youth leadership programs that prepare athletes for life beyond the locker room.

College sports can be a pipeline for national pride, but more profoundly, they can be a training ground for democratic engagement, civic accountability, and systemic change.

One promising blueprint comes from the Engaged Athlete Fellowship (EAF), an initiative that flips the NIL narrative from transactional to transformational. Developed by esteemed professors, coaches, professional athletes, and civic leaders, EAF offers a yearlong leadership curriculum grounded in purpose and impact. Fellows receive mentorship, support, and a financial stipend to design and execute a personalized civic engagement or service project, whether that’s increasing voter turnout on campus, organizing mental health resources for teammates, or advocating for underserved communities.

At the heart of the program is a multi-day, all-expenses-paid summit in Washington, D.C., where Fellows gather to share their projects, network with changemakers, and participate in workshops that connect athletics to activism. It’s not just leadership training—it’s a declaration that student-athletes are more than performers; they’re architects of social change.

That ethos is driven by Coach Joe Kennedy, a former Northwestern basketball player and White House public engagement aide, Chairman of The Team. In partnership with Coach Eric Reveno, Professor/Futurists Lisa Kay Solomon and others, Kennedy has led a civic movement to empower athletes as voters, advocates, and campus leaders, engaging millions nationwide.

“More than 500,000 student athletes are largely overlooked by most traditional civics programs,” Kennedy notes. “Yet these athletes are often some of the most powerful voices and influential leaders on their campuses.”

The Engaged Athlete Fellowship isn’t just a policy suggestion, it's an invitation. An invitation for athletic departments, civic organizations, and federal policymakers to rethink what it means to support student-athletes not merely by regulating what they can earn, but by investing in what they can build.

This executive order may be a start, but it’s not a solution. Until we center athletes' humanity alongside their marketability, the chaos will persist.

David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Read More

Red elephants and blue donkeys

The ACA subsidy deadline reveals how Republican paralysis and loyalty-driven leadership are hollowing out Congress’s ability to govern.

Carol Yepes

Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis

Picture a bridge with a clearly posted warning: without a routine maintenance fix, it will close. Engineers agree on the repair, but the construction crew in charge refuses to act. The problem is not that the fix is controversial or complex, but that making the repair might be seen as endorsing the bridge itself.

So, traffic keeps moving, the deadline approaches, and those responsible promise to revisit the issue “next year,” even as the risk of failure grows. The danger is that the bridge fails anyway, leaving everyone who depends on it to bear the cost of inaction.

Keep ReadingShow less
Who thinks Republicans will suffer in the 2026 midterms? Republican members of Congress

U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA); House Chamber at the U.S. Capitol on December 17, 2025,.

(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Who thinks Republicans will suffer in the 2026 midterms? Republican members of Congress

The midterm elections for Congress won’t take place until November, but already a record number of members have declared their intention not to run – a total of 43 in the House, plus 10 senators. Perhaps the most high-profile person to depart, Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, announced her intention in November not just to retire but to resign from Congress entirely on Jan. 5 – a full year before her term was set to expire.

There are political dynamics that explain this rush to the exits, including frustrations with gridlock and President Donald Trump’s lackluster approval ratings, which could hurt Republicans at the ballot box.

Keep ReadingShow less
Social Security card, treasury check and $100 bills
In swing states, both parties agree on ideas to save Social Security
JJ Gouin/Getty Images

Social Security Still Works, but Its Future Is Up to Us

Like many people over 60 and thinking seriously about retirement, I’ve been paying closer attention to Social Security, and recent changes have made me concerned.

Since its creation during the Great Depression, Social Security has been one of the most successful federal programs in U.S. history. It has survived wars, recessions, demographic change, and repeated ideological attacks, yet it continues to do what it was designed to do: provide a basic floor of income security for older Americans. Before Social Security, old age often meant poverty, dependence on family, or institutionalization. After its adoption, a decent retirement became achievable for millions.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Texas’ Housing Changes Betray Its Most Vulnerable Communities
Miniature houses with euro banknotes and sticky notes.

How Texas’ Housing Changes Betray Its Most Vulnerable Communities

While we celebrate the Christmas season, hardworking Texans, who we all depend on to teach our children, respond to emergencies, and staff our hospitals, are fretting about where they will live when a recently passed housing bill takes effect in 2026.

Born out of a surge in NIMBY (“not in my backyard”) politics and fueled by a self-interested landlord lawmaker, HB21 threatens to deepen the state’s housing crisis by restricting housing options—targeting affordable developments and the families who depend on them.

Keep ReadingShow less