Executive Order Meets Amateurism: Unpacking Trump’s NIL Order

This is not legal advice, but general information.

President Trump recently made waves in the world of college athletics by announcing an executive order aimed at reshaping name, image, and likeness (NIL) governance at the federal level. With NIL becoming an increasingly hot-button issue across the NCAA conferences, courts, and more recently Congress, this executive order signals a major shift toward regulating college sports where historically the federal government appeared determined to remain uninvolved.

Below is a breakdown of what President Trump’s executive order does, the key components of the order, and what it might mean for the NIL landscape moving forward.

What does the order actually do?

Contrary to some common misconceptions, executive orders do not create new laws and don’t override existing state or federal statutes. Instead, they function as legally binding directives that are issued by the executive branch directly to federal agencies. As such, these orders guide how the government’s various federal agencies interpret and enforce existing laws and often direct them to take certain actions to effectuate them.

This means that President Trump’s NIL executive order won’t directly repeal, change, or override any state’s current NIL laws. For example, the order is unlikely to have any direct impact on Oregon’s NIL statute, ORS 702. However, that doesn’t mean that the executive order can’t still have significant real-world effects. In fact, it’s much more likely that an executive order’s influence over federal agencies will have a trickle-down impact on each state’s laws (and by consequence each state’s residents) regardless of how it is drafted, than not. This is especially true when those orders instruct major federal agencies such as the Department of Labor or the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to take action that may influence how certain regulations are interpreted or enforced at the national level, like President Trump’s NIL order does.

In this case, President Trump’s order doesn’t just direct the Secretary of Labor and NLRB to act. Instead, it directs several federal agencies to take a range of actions concerning the evolving role of student-athletes in college sports. Given the broad scope of these directives, their full impact will depend on how each agency chooses to implement them, so they will not be discussed in detail here. What is clear, however, is that these agencies’ actions are likely to have long lasting influence on the future of NIL policy through federal guidance and enforcement priorities.

Key Components of the Executive Order

Employment Status. One of the most consequential provisions of President Trump’s executive order is its directive to the Secretary of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to “determine” and “implement the appropriate measures” to clarify whether collegiate athletes should be considered employees under federal law. This instruction appears designed to push back against recent efforts to expand labor protections to college athletes. However, given the broad language of the directive, the administration doesn’t appear to be taking a hard position on either side of the issue. That said, the order strongly suggests that preserving student athletes’ non-employee status is essential to maintaining the traditional model of amateurism and to shielding institutions from increased regulatory burdens.

Pay-for-Play. In contrast to its more measured approach to the employment status question, the order takes a firm stance against direct pay-for-play arrangements. In rejecting the pay-for-play model, the order effectively formalizes one of the central principles of the recent House Settlement. It also affirms that athletes may profit from third-party NIL deals, while emphasizing that NIL activity should remain independent of institutional oversight. This language reflects both a commitment to preserving the NCAA’s amateurism model and an alignment with the House Settlement’s development of the College Sports Commission’s review of NIL compensation for “fair market value” via NIL Go.

Non-Revenue Sports and Title IX. The order also addresses concerns about how increased NIL compensation might affect the broader college athletic system with respect to non-revenue sports and women’s sports. Specifically, it directs the Department of Education to evaluate how evolving NIL practices could impact compliance with Title IX and the availability of athletic opportunities across all sports, encourages the development of federal guidance to ensure that schools preserve opportunities for women’s athletics and Olympic development programs as the financial landscape continues to change, and calls upon collegiate athletic departments that fall within certain revenue thresholds from the 2024–2025 athletic season to meet defined benchmarks for roster spots and scholarship opportunities.

What Might Happen Next?

Although the executive order outlines a pathway for federal NIL policy, its actual impact will depend on how agencies choose to act. The Department of Labor and the NLRB, both of which had already shown interest in reevaluating the employment status of student athletes, will be key players to watch. Their past efforts faced mixed reactions, and whether they adjust their approach in response to the order or continue on their current path will significantly influence how NIL and labor rights develop for collegiate athletes.

Agency action is also likely to trigger more legal challenges despite its intent to stabilize the current NIL climate. Advocacy groups, unions, and athletes may contest new policies or the order itself depending on how the implementation of the order impacts student athletes’ rights and benefits moving forward. Ongoing cases like Johnson v. NCAA are already testing whether student athletes qualify as employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act, so changes in the policies of certain agencies could trigger additional litigation or shape the outcome of existing cases.

Most importantly, the executive order may renew pressure on Congress to pass federal NIL legislation. While proposals like the SCORE Act have stalled in the past, the order places a lot of emphasis the growing risks of leaving the current patchwork of state laws and NCAA policies in place without intervention. Whether Congress will act remains uncertain, but the order adds urgency to a conversation that has struggled to gain traction in recent years. Overall, the order doesn’t change the law, but it does signal that NIL is now a national policy priority. In the months ahead, its influence will depend on the actions of agencies, courts, and lawmakers alike and legal professionals operating within the space should be keeping a close eye.