WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.), and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) sent a letter to U.S. Senators Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, in opposition to the Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements (SCORE) Act recently introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives. In the letter, the senators blasted the SCORE Act’s antitrust exemption as a bailout for the NCAA after several court cases held them accountable for violating the law, and warned the bill would roll back years of progress for student athletes throughout the country. Earlier this year, Murphy similarly criticized the antitrust exemptions for the NCAA laid out in President Trump’s college sports executive order.

The senators wrote: “As greater attention is focused on reforming the college athletics paradigm, Congress has a unique opportunity to restructure the system to put student athletes first. However, recently proposed legislation – including the Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements (SCORE) Act – threatens to roll back the progress student athletes have made and put the power back into the hands of the NCAA.”

They drew attention to the SCORE Act’s antitrust exemption, which would eliminate athletes’ primary tool against harm and illegal behavior: “Among the SCORE Act’s misguided proposals is a broad antitrust exemption for the NCAA. The SCORE Act would grant the NCAA antitrust immunity and shield it from litigation, which has served as the primary mechanism through which athletes can assert their rights and highlight illegal behavior by the NCAA. This antitrust exemption is the top priority for the NCAA because it would permit coordination between the NCAA and its member institutions in ways that primarily serve their own financial and competitive interests. It’s no surprise that the NCAA is asking Congress for antitrust immunity: the NCAA keeps losing in court because of its repressive rules that harm athletes.”

The senators stressed the SCORE Act would allow the NCAA free rein to reconsolidate power and wield it ruthlessly against athletes: “The NCAA’s push for antitrust immunity is not about protecting athlete amateurism or opportunity, it is about power. After a string of court defeats, the NCAA is hoping Congress will grant it the ability to coordinate compensation limits, restrict athlete mobility, and shield it from future legal challenges. Without the threat of antitrust enforcement, the NCAA would once again have unchecked authority to set national rules that suppress athlete pay and preserve its own financial position.”

They also cited the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling in NCAA v. Alston that the NCAA and its members are not entitled to blanket antitrust immunity, arguing that the SCORE Act threatens to undermine that ruling and inject more uncertainty into the college athletics landscape.

The senators concluded: “Given the NCAA’s long and well-documented history of exploiting college athletes, we strongly oppose the antitrust exemption included in the SCORE Act. There is no question that Congress must intervene to reform the college athletics ecosystem to benefit college athletes. However, such reform cannot include broad antitrust immunity for the NCAA. Granting this immunity would enable the NCAA to continue unchecked its exploitative practices and take away an important mechanism for college athletes to hold the NCAA and its members accountable.”

For years, Murphy has been one of the U.S. Senate’s most strident advocates for the rights and fair compensation of college athletes. Earlier this year, he reintroduced the College Athlete Right to Organize Act (CARO), legislation to codify the right of college athletes to unionize and collectively bargain for fair compensation and better working conditions, and the College Athlete Economic Freedom Act to expand and codify the right of college athletes to be fairly compensated for the use of their Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL).

The full letter is available below and HERE.

Dear Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell,

Over the last few years, we have seen the blatant exploitation of college athletes by major athletic conferences, large universities, and the National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA), begin to subside. Make no mistake: college athletics is in need of serious and thoughtful reform, but recently, college athletes have begun to share in the enormous profits they generate for their institutions. At the same time, more and more lawmakers are taking seriously our obligation to ensure that the system does not continue to advantage large institutions and the NCAA at the expense of the athletes whose labor makes those profits possible.

As greater attention is focused on reforming the college athletics paradigm, Congress has a unique opportunity to restructure the system to put college athletes first. However, recently proposed legislation – including the Student Compensation and Opportunity through Rights and Endorsements (SCORE) Act – threatens to roll back the progress college athletes have made and put the power back into the hands of the NCAA.

Among the SCORE Act’s misguided proposals is a broad antitrust exemption for the NCAA. The SCORE Act would grant the NCAA antitrust immunity and shield it from litigation, which has served as the primary mechanism through which athletes can assert their rights and highlight illegal behavior by the NCAA. This antitrust exemption is the top priority for the NCAA because it would permit coordination between the NCAA and its member institutions in ways that primarily serve their own financial and competitive interests. It’s no surprise that the NCAA is asking Congress for antitrust immunity: the NCAA keeps losing in court because of its repressive rules that harm athletes.

The NCAA’s push for antitrust immunity is not about protecting athlete amateurism or opportunity, it is about power. After a string of court defeats, the NCAA is hoping Congress will grant it the ability to coordinate compensation limits, restrict athlete mobility, and shield it from future legal challenges. Without the threat of antitrust enforcement, the NCAA would once again have unchecked authority to set national rules that suppress athlete pay and preserve its own financial position.

Furthermore, in 2021, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Alston that the NCAA and its members are not entitled to blanket antitrust immunity. As Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote, “Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate…The NCAA is not above the law.” Passing the SCORE Act threatens to undermine the unanimous ruling in Alston and inject more uncertainty into the college athletics landscape.

Given the NCAA’s long and well-documented history of exploiting college athletes, we strongly oppose the antitrust exemption included in the SCORE Act. There is no question that Congress must intervene to reform the college athletics ecosystem to benefit college athletes. However, such reform cannot include broad antitrust immunity for the NCAA. Granting this immunity would enable the NCAA to continue unchecked its exploitative practices and take away an important mechanism for college athletes to hold the NCAA and its members accountable.