Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Lawmakers and experts warn revenue‑sharing formula could shortchange women athletes under Title IX
Loading...
Summary
Members of the House hearing and witnesses raised concerns that proposed revenue‑sharing formulas outlined in the tentative settlement and in some institutional plans could allocate the bulk of new payments to football and men’s basketball, potentially creating Title IX compliance issues and deepening gender disparities.
Lawmakers on the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee and several witnesses raised concerns that the distribution formulas in a tentative class‑action settlement and in some institutional plans could leave women’s and other nonrevenue sports with a disproportionately small share of new revenue.
Rep. Lori Trahan and Rep. Debbie Dingell emphasized that women’s sports have seen rapid growth in viewership and participation, but that testimony and public reporting indicate the proposed settlement allocation would direct most payments to football and men’s basketball. Rep. Trahan and others cited reporting and expert analysis that the tentative settlement would direct roughly 75% of certain payouts to football players, 15% to men’s basketball, 5% to women’s basketball and 5% for all other athletes — figures witnesses said could create Title IX compliance risks depending on how institutions apply them.
Josh Whitman, athletic director at the University of Illinois, told members his institution intends to continue Title IX compliance and is seeking legal clarity about how Title IX applies to these new payments. He said institutions face a “challenging balancing of equities” because applying traditional Title IX proportionality tests to new, market‑driven payments could divert funds away from athletes who generate most of the revenue, many of whom are students of color.
Witnesses and members urged Congress to provide clearer guidance to avoid a future in which revenue‑sharing amplifies historical disparities. Emily Cole, a former Duke athlete who testified about opportunities that NIL has created for nonrevenue athletes, urged protections that ensure Olympic and nonrevenue sports are not harmed by policy changes. Lawmakers asked for analyses of how settlement distributions would intersect with Title IX obligations and requested follow‑up materials and legal memos in the hearing record.
No final legal determinations were made at the hearing. Members from both parties said they expect Title IX to be a central issue in any legislative response and asked witnesses and counsel to provide more detailed compliance assessments.
