Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ANTITRUST NEWS: Protect College Sports Act and its antitrust exemptions pass key Senate hurdle, (Sep 16, 2026)

By Peter Reap, J.D., LL.M.

The bipartisan supported bill aims to bring stability and fair competition to college athletics with a federal NIL law and antitrust protection from lawsuits.

The U.S. Senate on September 15 voted 74-24 to invoke cloture and advance for consideration the Protect College Sports Act (PCSA) (S. 4668) which contains two antitrust exemptions among its provisions that aim to help bring order to a college sports landscape now facing both skyrocketing player compensation and increasing athlete transfers. For the last few years, it has been widely reported that college sports is in crisis following years of antitrust and name, image, and likeness (NIL) court rulings that threaten the viability of smaller school athletic programs and non-moneymaking sports. The PCSA aims to end the disorder facing college athletics by establishing nationwide standards for NIL, transfers, eligibility, and enforcement.

The PCSA is a bipartisan bill authored and introduced by U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, and Committee Chairman Ted Cruz (R-Texas). It consists of two parts: (1) Title I creates a federal NIL right and contains rules for eligibility, transfer, and many other things, as well as an antitrust exemption for an intercollegiate athletic association, conference or institution if it complies and enforces the PCSA; and (2) Title II allows for a voluntary collective to pool of schools to jointly negotiate their media rights and amends the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 to extend antitrust protection to such a covered entity or pool while imposing restrictions on the sale of those rights.

The antitrust exemption in Title I of the PCSA is only provided to an intercollegiate athletic association that has established rules, bylaws, or other regulations implementing most of the Act’s other provisions. These include PCSA provisions setting forth detailed rules on:

1. prohibited compensation and agreements with athletes and coaches;

2. extension of the revenue sharing cap created by the settlement of the landmark College Athlete NIL Litigation in 2025;

3. athletic eligibility;

4. NIL protections;

5. recruitment and tampering;

6. transfers;

7. participation in a championship or tournament;

8. agents; and

9. mid-season coaching transfers.

The antitrust exemption set out in Title II only applies to a covered entity that fully complies with the PCSA’s detailed rules set out in other sections governing such entities and their sales of media rights, including provisions concerning the protection of women’s and Olympic sports, preservation of traditional rivalries, and the merger of athletics conferences.

Republicans tout PCSA advancement. A news release by the Republicans of the Senate Commerce, Science, & Transportation Committee featured remarks of Committee Chairman Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the lead Republican sponsor of the legislation, in announcing the advancement of the bill. Cruz stated on the Senate floor:

“Today is a chance for us to stand up and fight for the half million college athletes who are competing right now because, if the Senate doesn’t act, hundreds of thousands of those students will see their roster slots go away and their scholarships go away. Let’s fight for the students to protect their rights, to protect their future. Let’s come together and demonstrate that the Senate, Republicans and Democrats working together, can lead and protect an institution that is unique and valuable that is college sports in America.”

The release also highlighted a press conference hosted by Cruz with more than 30 student athletes and coaches from across the country to discuss the PCSA. In addition, the release linked to statements from numerous supporters of the legislation, including coaches and athletes.

Democrat support for PCSA. The Democrats of the Senate Commerce, Science, & Transportation Committee issued their own press release on the advancement of the PCSA featuring remarks by ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.): “This bill brings order to [college sports]. It helps women and Olympic sports, and it sets up a commission to look at the real future, which I think should include collective bargaining […] Let’s bring some sanity. Recognize that athletes do deserve revenue sharing, and that this bill will put that into law for the first time.”

The release also highlighted a number of major provisions/benefits of the legislation:

• First-ever NIL right

• New contract & agent rules with real teeth to protect athletes

• Academic & scholarship guarantee

• Student athletes’ health and safety protections while in school

• Healthcare protections when season over

• Equal gender treatment for tournaments

• Protections for women’s and Olympic sports

• Athlete Ombudsman for student guidance

• Whistleblower protections

• More revenue for every participating school

COSAL opposition to PCSA. The Committee to Support the Antitrust Laws (COSAL) sent a letter on September 14 to Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell announcing its strong opposition to PCSA. According to COSAL:

As drafted, the PCSA would grant the NCAA sweeping, unprecedented immunity from antitrust scrutiny and expand its control over college athletics with little to no accountability. The bill’s broad antitrust exemption in Title I, expansion of the Sports Broadcasting Act in Title II, and lack of meaningful enforcement mechanisms together create a framework that places the NCAA above the laws that govern every other industry.

This approach would entrench and amplify the NCAA’s well-documented pattern of exploiting college athletes for financial gain—while stripping those athletes of basic protections against the NCAA’s market power.

COSAL strongly opposes the PCSA as drafted and cannot support the legislation unless these fundamental flaws are addressed.

The signatories on the letter include American Economic Liberties Project, Committee to Support the Antitrust Laws, Consumer Federation of America, and several former FTC and Antitrust Division officials.

MainStory: TopStory Antitrust GCNNews