A flurry of new federal bills have been introduced to create uniformity in the marketplace for athlete’s monetization of their name, image and likeness. Currently, NIL operates under a patchwork of state NIL laws, with only a few broad rules and guidelines from the NCAA. More recently, states have begun passing laws that prohibit the NIL from even enforcing its NIL rules.

Although nearly a dozen bills have been introduced at the federal level over the past few years, none have ever made it out of committee. The new round of bills include some interesting provisions we haven’t seen before, but the fact that multiple bills with such varying priorities have been introduced illustrates that we still don’t have a consensus at the federal level about what a federal NIL standard should look like.

Below, I’m breaking down the three bills introduced in 2023, as well as a draft bill for discussion that was made public.

The College Athlete Economic Freedom Act was reintroduced by Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Rep. Lori Trahan, D-Mass, who first introduced the bill in February 2021 prior to the NCAA’s rule change regarding NIL. The 2023 version, however, has added several new provisions to address issues that have become apparent as NIL has played out over the last two years.

A unique piece of their legislation is a provision that would allow international college athletes to fully exploit their NIL without any violation of their F-1 student visa status. Taking it one step further, the bill also protects international student athletes if college athletes are found to be employees.

Another notable provision would require universities and conferences to obtain a group license from athletes for using their NIL in any kind of promotion, including through their media rights deals. Universities and conferences would have to notify athletes how their NIL was being used and the revenue generated by the deal so athletes would have the information necessary to negotiate for their share of the revenue. California has already proposed a bill that would require revenue sharing with athletes in its state.

Other specifics from the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act include:

UCLA quarterback Chase Griffin endorsed the bill saying, “A unanimous Supreme Court, the Department of Justice Antitrust Division, and states across the country have emphatically recognized the right of college athletes to share in the economic freedoms that are the bedrock of the American Dream. At present, the United States Congress stands alone as the only governmental institution contemplating NIL legislation that will deprive over half a million college athletes the full measure of economic freedom currently enjoyed by our peers and every other American. For the past two years NIL has enabled college athletes, like me, to become small business owners, taxpayers, support the families that raised us, contribute to charities, and re-invest in the communities that we represent.”

Sydney Moore, a Division 1 Volleyball Player at Cornell University and advocate program lead at the VOICEINSPORT Foundation, supported the bill as well.

“Women-athletes, like me, are at our highest earning potential during our collegiate careers, thus it is imperative that NIL policy upholds the integrity of Title IX and informs us of our fair share. Additionally as a student-athlete of color, it is crucial that all athletes are protected regardless of their race or nationality.”

Sens. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., and Joe Manchin, D-W. Va., have introduced the Protecting Athletes, Schools, and Sports Act of 2023, which contrasts with The College Athlete Economic Freedom Act introduced by Senator Murphy and Representative Trahan in that it includes specific protections for universities, with some prohibitions on NIL activity and limitations on transferring.

This legislation is endorsed by NCAA President Charlie Baker, in addition to university presidents from West Virginia, Auburn, Alabama and Notre Dame, as well as the Big 12 Conference and the Southeastern Conference.

"This important legislation is a major step in the right direction to ensure the health and safety of student-athletes, includes key measures to increase consumer protections and transparency in the NIL market, and aims to protect women’s and Olympic sports,” said Baker.

This legislation would relieve the NCAA, conferences and institutions from liability for their efforts to comply with the legislation. It would also prohibit NIL deals involving alcohol, drugs or in conflict with school and conference licenses. NIL deals that would be considered inducements to attend or transfer to a particular institution are also specifically prohibited, although there’s no real detail on how inducement would be proven.

Under this legislation, agents and collectives would be required to register with a regulating body. Additionally, all NIL deals would have to be disclosed within 30 days, and a public-facing website would publish anonymized data.

This bill, like the The College Athlete Economic Freedom Act also mentions the FTC, allowing the NCAA to report violations to the agency to strengthen enforcement and oversight.

A unique provision of this piece of legislation is a limitation on transferring which doesn’t allow transfer without penalty until an athlete has completed their first three years of athletic eligibility, subject to a few exceptions.

This bill also includes provisions aimed at the health and safety of athletes. It would grant athletes guaranteed health insurance for sports-related injuries for uninsured athletes for eight years following graduation. Institutions with more than $20 million in athletics revenue would be required to pay out-of-pocket expenses for two years, with those earning more than $450 million in revenue extended to four years.

Other notable provisions include:

In May, Representatives Mike Carey, R-OH-15 and Greg Landsman, D-OH-1, reintroduced the Student Athlete Level Playing Field Act, which was originally introduced by Representative Anthony Gonzalez in 2021.

This bill also contemplates involvement from the FTC, requiring deals for more than $500 to be uploaded to an FTC clearinghouse that would be established. In addition, the FTC would be tasked with creating a program to register agents, which agents would need to register with prior to working with student athletes.

In addition to banning recruiting inducements, it would also ensure athletes are not considered employees, impacting both the Johnson v. NCAA case and the NLRB’s charges against the NCAA, the Pac-12 Conference and the University of Southern California.

Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.; Jerry Moran, R-Kan., and Cory Booker, D-N.J. announced a bipartisan discussion draft for the College Athletes Protection & Compensation Act in July. In addition to provisions aimed at NIL, it also addresses health and safety concerns.

This legislation calls for the creation of the College Athletics Corporation (CAC), a central oversight entity tasked with creating and enforcing rules and standards to protect athletes entering into NIL deals.

A Medical Trust Fund would be created to cover out-of-pocket expenses for injuries and other long-term issues arising from the athlete’s participation in sports. Additionally, institutions would be required to cover tuition, books and other fees until an athlete graduates, even if the athlete had a career-ending injury or was cut from the team.

It remains to be seen which of these bills, and its backers, can garner enough support to get it out of committee and up for a vote in one of the chambers. With Congress heading into recess in August, it could be a while before we know.