Trump just issued an executive order on paying college athletes. What’s in it?

As universities across the country gear up to directly pay their athletes, President Donald Trump issued an executive order aiming to not only “preserve” but expand college sports where possible.

“My administration will therefore provide the stability, fairness, and balance necessary to protect student-athletes, collegiate athletic scholarships and opportunities, and the special American institution of college sports,” according to the July 24 order.

“It is common sense that college sports are not, and should not be, professional sports, and my administration will take action accordingly.”

A federal judge last month approved the House v. NCAA settlement on revenue sharing, clearing the way for schools to set aside up to $20.5 million to pay college athletes, which works out to about 22% of the average athletic department revenue at Power Four schools. Most schools have said the bulk of the payments would go to football players.

The settlement imposes new scholarship rules and roster limits, and resolved multiple antitrust lawsuits with a $2.8 billion payout to athletes who couldn’t access NIL opportunities in the past due to the timing of their college careers. Athletes were allowed to profit from the use of their name, image and likeness starting in 2021.

Some schools say that revenue sharing — football and men’s basketball generate the most for college athletics departments — will force them to cut or drop non-revenue sports.

What’s in Trump’s executive order?

According to the order, a national solution is “urgently” needed to keep college sports from “deteriorating beyond repair” and to protect non-revenue sports, including many women’s sports.

The order mandates college athletics departments take measures to expand or maintain scholarship opportunities and roster spots next season based on their 2024-25 revenue:

• Schools that make more than $125 million in the 2024-25 season should provide more scholarships and the maximum number of roster spots for non-revenue sports next season.
• Schools that make more $50 million in the 2024-25 should provide at least as many scholarships and the maximum number of roster spots for non-revenue sports next season.
• Schools that make less than $50 million in the 2024-2025 athletic season or that do not have any revenue-generating sports should not disproportionately reduce scholarship opportunities or roster spots for sports based on the revenue that the sport generate.
• Revenue sharing between schools and athletes should preserve or expand scholarships and athletic opportunities in women’s and non-revenue sports.

The federal policy calls third-party, pay-for-play payments to college athletes “improper” and should not be permitted by universities. It doesn’t apply to compensation for the fair market value that the athlete provides to a third party, such as for a brand endorsement.

Are college athletes university employees?

The executive order also addresses the question of whether college athletes are university employees, though it makes no determination.

The order leaves it to the Secretary of Labor and the NLRB to “implement the appropriate measures with respect to clarifying the status of collegiate athletes,” including through guidance, rules or other actions to maximize the educational benefits and opportunities provided by universities through athletics.

A Biden administration memo deemed college athletes employees under federal labor law. Trump revoked the guidance shortly after taking office. Also, a National Labor Relations Board regional director ruled last year that the Dartmouth men’s basketball players attempting to unionize were university employees. The team ultimately dropped the effort.

The NCAA and universities across the country have adamantly held that college athletes are not employees. A U.S. House committee held at least one hearing on the issue last year.

Republicans, including Utah Rep. Burgess Owens, who says unionization poses an “existential threat” to the future of college athletics, condemned the Dartmouth decision. Democrats, though, like California Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, say the “sky is not falling” and athletes should have a seat at the table through collective bargaining.

Should government be involved with college sports?

The Trump order calls for the secretary of Education, in consultation with the attorney general, the secretary of Health and Human Services and Federal Trade Commission chairman, to develop a plan to advance the policies in the next 30 days.

Steve Berman, one of the co-lead plaintiff attorneys in the antitrust settlement, criticized Trump for trying to intervene.

“Plain and simple, college athletes don’t need Trump’s help, and he shouldn’t be aiding the NCAA at the expense of athletes,” Berman said last week, per ESPN. “... As a result of our case, college athletes are now free to make their own deals. For Trump to want to put his foot on their deal-making abilities is unwarranted and flouts his own philosophy on the supposed ‘art of the deal.’”

NCAA president Charlie Baker has advocated for a federal standard to create competitive balance in college sports. Specifically, Baker and other college sports leaders have asked Congress for an antitrust exemption so they can enforce rules, many of which would limit athlete earning power, per ESPN.

“The association appreciates the Trump administration’s focus on the life-changing opportunities college sports provides millions of young people and we look forward to working with student-athletes, a bipartisan coalition in Congress and the Trump administration to enhance college sports for years to come,” Baker said in a statement regarding Trump’s executive order.

More than two dozen college athletic conferences, including Power Four leagues, have also called for federal legislation and a uniform NIL standard across college sports. At least 30 states, including Utah, have NIL laws.

Utah legislators modified the law this year to allow schools in the state to directly compensate athletes regardless of the outcome of the House settlement. HB479 also clearly states that college athletes are not university employees.

Congress has debated several bills, including as recently as this month, aimed at regulating college athlete compensation.

The proposed SCORE act would codify the right for student athletes to get paid for the use of their NIL and override a patchwork of state laws, including in Utah, around the country. The bill, approved by two Republican-led House committees, would also give the NCAA broad antitrust leeway. It could go to the full House for Representatives for a vote this fall. It has little Democratic support.