The House canceled its vote on the SCORE Act — the main federal college sports legislation — for the third time on May 19, 2026. The Congressional Black Caucus announced unanimous opposition, removing the votes needed for passage. The NCAA's antitrust future, NIL, and athlete employment status remain unresolved at the federal level. The Senate is now the most likely venue for action, with Senators Ted Cruz and Maria Cantwell drafting a bipartisan alternative.

For the third time in less than a year, Congress failed to pass a federal framework for college athlete compensation. House Republican leaders pulled the SCORE Act from the floor schedule on Monday, May 19, when it became clear the votes were not there.1

If you are a college athlete, a high school athlete weighing scholarship decisions, or a family trying to understand how NIL money actually works, here is what the latest collapse means — and what it does not mean.

What the SCORE Act Would Have Done

The SCORE Act was designed to end the current state of legal and regulatory chaos in college sports. Its core provisions:

Antitrust protection for the NCAA. The bill would have given the NCAA and its member conferences legal cover to set their own rules on eligibility, transfers, and compensation — shielding them from the wave of antitrust litigation that has upended college sports since 2021.

Pre-emption of state NIL laws. Roughly 30 states have enacted their own name, image, and likeness laws since California's 2021 law opened the door. The SCORE Act would have replaced all of them with a single national standard.

Employment prohibition. The bill explicitly barred college athletes from being classified as employees of their universities. This was its most controversial element — and the provision that ultimately fractured the coalition needed to pass it.

Why the Vote Was Canceled

The Congressional Black Caucus announced its unanimous opposition on May 19, the same day leadership was set to hold the vote. The CBC's 54 House members — all voting against — made the math unworkable.2

The CBC's stated objection was indirect: members argued that provisions giving the NCAA authority over conference membership could disadvantage historically Black colleges and universities, and that the process reinforced geographic redistricting inequities. The concern was less about athlete pay and more about institutional power within conference structures.

Without Democratic support, Republicans needed near-unanimous GOP votes. They did not have them. House leadership pulled the bill.

This was not the first failure. A vote tentatively scheduled for September 2025 was delayed. In December 2025, the bill was pulled just hours before a scheduled floor vote. May 19 was the third cancellation.1

What Comes Next

The Senate is now the most active venue. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), chair of the Senate Commerce Committee, and Maria Cantwell (D-Washington), its ranking member, are in active negotiations on a bipartisan bill.1 As of May 25, no bill text had been released publicly.

Cruz and Cantwell have emphasized athlete compensation directly — rather than just codifying NCAA authority. If their bill emerges, it is expected to look different from the House version that repeatedly failed to advance.

If you have an existing NIL deal or are in the process of negotiating one, nothing changes today. Your agreement is governed by your state's law or your school's rules. The federal vacuum affects future policy — not current contracts.

What Stays the Same for Now

NIL remains state-by-state. Without federal pre-emption, the patchwork of state laws continues. Schools in California, Florida, and Texas operate under different NIL rules than schools in states without legislation. That gap stays open.

Revenue sharing continues under court supervision. The House v. NCAA settlement — which allows schools to share up to roughly $20 million per year directly with athletes — is proceeding under court supervision regardless of congressional action. Many major programs have already begun making those payments.

Transfer rules are set by Trump's executive order. The executive order President Trump signed on April 3, 2026, directed the NCAA to implement a five-year eligibility window and limit transfers. Those rules take effect August 1, 2026. Congressional inaction does not change that timeline. Read the full breakdown of Trump's college sports order →

What This Means for Prospective College Athletes

If you are deciding between schools with athletic scholarships, the legislative uncertainty has practical implications. Schools in strong-NIL states may still offer structurally different deal environments than those in states with weaker protections. Revenue-sharing amounts are set by each school's agreement with the House settlement — some schools are paying far more than others.

If you are weighing athletic scholarships as part of your overall financial strategy, the Athletic Scholarship Reality Check explains what those deals actually cover and what they leave out. For athletes thinking about transfers, our how to transfer colleges guide covers what the current rules require. And if you are managing your schedule as a student athlete, the college athlete time management guide is a practical starting point.

One thing that won't change regardless of what Congress does: the math of paying for college. Before borrowing extra to cover costs not covered by an athletic scholarship, read our breakdown of how much student debt is too much.

Footnotes

  1. Deseret News. (2026, May 19). Proposal seeking to regulate how NCAA pays student-athletes falls apart in Congress. Deseret News. https://www.deseret.com/politics/2026/05/19/student-athlete-pay-bill-pulled-from-schedule/ ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  2. NPR. (2026, May 23). Congressional Black Caucus opposes bipartisan bill for college athletes' compensation. National Public Radio. https://www.npr.org/2026/05/23/nx-s1-5828842/congressional-black-caucus-opposes-bipartisan-bill-for-college-athletes-compensation ↩