Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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

​U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 21, 2026. Hegseth is crafting a strong and masculine identity for his audience as he reportedly contemplates a presidential run.

(Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Politicians Can’t Just ’Give the People What They Want’

For reasons that will baffle my many detractors, I am often asked for advice about being an opinion journalist. One of my standard responses is: You have to be willing to disappoint your biggest fans.

What I mean is that if you start to see your job as telling fans what they want to hear, you risk becoming an entertainer rather than a thinker, and eventually you become a caricature. I’ve seen it happen numerous times. Patrick Buchanan was a brilliant columnist and a serious person. But over the course of his career, he listened too much to the people who said, “Go Pat, go!” and too little to friends who said, “I think that’s taking it too far.”

Keep ReadingShow less
White marble exterior of the United States Capitol, often called the Capitol Building, is the home of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government

Congress approval is at a record-low 10%. Moderation and consensus-building, not partisan theatrics, are how Washington gets problems solved.

Richard Sharrocks / Getty Images

Reclaiming the Politics of the Possible

Washington is stuck in a cycle of performative conflict. The incentives seem to reward outrage, not outcomes that last; purity tests, not problem‑solving. So it’s no surprise that after three shutdowns in less than a year, public approval of Congress collapsed to just 10 percent this spring. (Gallup, April 2026.) But the country we live in — where many middle-income families report persistent financial strain and businesses are navigating unprecedented technological upheaval — cannot be governed by theatrics. Breaking this cycle requires moderation, consensus‑building, and a cooperative approach to governance.

This is not a call for centrism as an ideology. Instead, this is a call for transformative leaders to embrace moderation as their governing strategy, recognizing that in a pluralistic country of nearly 350 million people durable solutions require broad and stable alliances. Ultimately, this is a call for the 240 million of us who are eligible to vote in November to elect consensus-builders instead of bomb-throwers, and healers instead of arsonists.

Keep ReadingShow less
Adult man holds a microphone while asking a question during a town hall meeting.

Congress ignored 90% of public support for background checks. Learn how citizen assemblies and sortition helped Ireland break gridlock and could work in the US.

SDI Productions/Getty Images

Consensus Without Power: How Sortition Could Break America's Legislative Gridlock

In April 2013, four months after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting killed twenty children, the US Senate voted on the Manchin-Toomey Act to expand background checks and to include gun-show and internet sales of firearms. Roughly nine in ten Americans, including a majority of gun owners, supported the bill—a figure that has held steady across more than a decade of polling. It fell short of the 60-vote threshold by six votes. This was not an outlier. On complex issues, representatives often fail to translate public consensus into reality. Research shows that legislators consistently vote in line with donor and interest group preferences over constituent opinion. Before the vote, the National Rifle Association (NRA) warned every senator it would “rate” their vote on its annual rating system, and a low NRA rating could cost senators their next primary. Consequently, the bill died 54-46, and the majority of Americans watched, powerless, as their consensus was overridden by self-interested representatives.

Liberal democracies need a method to bypass electoral incentives that run counter to public opinion. One already exists: Ireland faced the same stalemate on complex issues before it instituted a process called sortition. The beauty of sortition lies in its removal of the primary pressure that misaligns representatives’ interests from public interest: reelection. Much like jury duty, citizens are randomly drawn from the population. An independent body then stratifies the pool, so the final group mirrors the country by age, gender, geography, and income. The group meets over weeks or months, hearing from experts and the public, as well as debating frequently. At the end, it issues a recommendation that parliament may then put to a referendum or pass into law.

Keep ReadingShow less
California’s New Law Aims To Close a Housing Gap for Domestic Violence Survivors
Emily Scherer for The 19th; Getty Images

California’s New Law Aims To Close a Housing Gap for Domestic Violence Survivors

Domestic violence survivors often struggle to find housing, and California’s “Unseen and Unheard Housing Act” will help make more housing available to meet their specific needs.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the bill Sunday requiring cities and counties to factor in domestic violence survivors when planning for future housing.

Keep ReadingShow less