Is the College Athletics Reform Act the Legislative Fix College Sports Needs?

Early this month, Former Division 1 volleyball player and current Massachusetts representative Lori Trahan introduced the College Athletics Reform Act (CARA), just as the SCORE Act was scheduled for a vote. Trahan describes the SCORE Act as “flawed” legislation that “will roll back the rights of college athletes and hand massive giveaways to the NCAA and powerful conferences.” The College Athletics Reform Act has been set up as an alternative to the SCORE Act, and as voting for the SCORE Act has been delayed several times late in 2025, CARA just might gain enough momentum to become a contender for federal legislation surrounding college athlete NIL rights and more in 2026.

So what’s in the bill and what could it mean for college athletes? Notably, the College Athletics Reform Act would:

• Enshrine unrestricted NIL rights into federal law and establish a federal standard for NIL. This would ensure that Trahan’s legislation trumps any state-level laws and athletic policies surrounding NIL

• Ensure that athletes cannot face retribution for accepting NIL deals

• Amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to ensure that international college athletes on F1 visas can monetize their NIL

• Amends the Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act to protect athletes from nefarious agents by implementing fee caps and requiring contracts to include termination agreements.

• Calls on the FTC to conduct research to develop a program to regulate and develop standards for agents of college athletes

• Establish a Commission to Stabilize College Sports, comprised of members with significant representation of former or current college athletes, to study matters like collective bargaining and athlete safety

• Like similar legislation, the CARA will also amend the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 to allow schools to pool media rights

• Amend the language of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to expand disclosure requirements in collegiate athletics and strengthen Title IX compliance by requiring athletic institutions to submit annual reports detailing their compliance with the law

Overall, Trahan’s new bill is quite unique. Although it borrows from the SAFE Act in its goal to amend the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961, the bill also features several new requirements. Its section on the Immigration and Nationality Act is one in just a handful of legislation that addresses NIL rights for international college athletes (ICAs), who are currently not allowed to monetize their NIL due to student visa requirements. Although there are loopholes around this prohibition (for instance, an ICA can sign brand deals in the U.S. and execute them in their home country), ensuring that ICAs enjoy the same NIL rights as domestic students is a significant inclusion in the bill.

The bill’s section on Title IX compliance is also unique. Typically, an athletic program will only prove its Title IX compliance when it is legally challenged by an injured party. Although the law has opened many athletic and educational opportunities for women since its passing in 1972, its reactive enforcement method makes it less likely for victims of discrimination to speak out and seek damages. By requiring athletic institutions to proactively report their compliance on an annual basis, the bill has promising implications for the future of gender equity in college sports.

Overall, the College Athletics Reform Act does what very few NIL-centric bills have managed to do: protect college athletes without infringing on their rights or infantalizing them with excessive restrictions and guardrails. Unlike the SCORE Act, the bill does not provide an antitrust exemption for the NCAA, nor does it ban athletic employment, and unlike many NIL bills and laws, CARA also does not require a NIL clearinghouse or other reporting procedures surrounding athletes’ NIL activities. While the bill could do more to ensure employee status for college athletes, it is a solid counter to the SCORE Act and other notoriously restrictive NIL legislation and represents a major step forward when it comes to future thinking on athlete rights.