Two California lawmakers are pushing back against the idea that the proposed House settlement with the NCAA could restrict athletes from within the state receiving the unfettered access to name, image and likeness compensation to which they are entitled by law.
State Sen. (D-Berkeley) and Sen. Steven Bradford (D-Gardena) were among a group of lawmakers who issued a statement Thursday saying state law should supersede any edict in a proposed settlement that would prohibit universities from complying with NCAA and conference NIL rules.
“Terms in the preliminary settlement in House vs. NCAA attempt to allow the NCAA and conferences to restrict our college athletes’ freedom to earn NIL compensation from boosters and NIL collectives, for example,” Skinner and Bradford said in a joint statement with Nebraska state Sen. Megan Hunt and Oregon state Sen. James Manning Jr. “However, this and other restrictions are illegal in our respective state.”
As part of the proposed House settlement, athletes would no longer receive compensation from NIL collectives, cutting off a massive stream of revenue. According to Opendorse, NIL compensation from collectives was expected to represent 82% of the estimated $1.6 billion in NIL compensation paid to athletes in 2024.
Lawmakers pointed out in their statement that California law forbids universities from prohibiting NIL compensation paid by athletic boosters and NIL collectives to athletes; from complying with or enforcing any conference or NCAA rules that restrict or prohibit NIL compensation paid by athletic boosters and NIL collectives to athletes; and from prohibiting conferences and the NCAA from restricting athletes’ NIL freedoms and compensation.
The lawmakers added that their respective states were not a party to the lawsuit and any settlement would not impact their states’ ability to enforce individual NIL laws. California is one of 17 states that prohibits restrictions on athletes’ NIL compensation and one of at least four states that allows universities to pay NIL compensation directly to athletes.
Ramogi Huma, a former linebacker and the executive director of the National College Players Assn., said he did not expect any universities to comply with House settlement restrictions on NIL because doing so would put them at a competitive disadvantage.
Even if the House settlement is denied, Huma said, college athletes in California should expect to receive direct pay from their schools because of state law. Huma said the NCPA was in the process of helping lawmakers in other states prepare similar legislation that would allow their universities to participate in NIL-based revenue sharing.
Since UCLA and will soon have a deluge of revenue from the Big Ten and College Football Playoff at their disposal to pay NIL compensation to their athletes, Huma said, other states are likely to adopt similar NIL laws to allow similar distributions.
