California commission backs amended Muhammad Ali American Boxing Revival Act, 6‑0

The California State Athletic Commission voted unanimously Oct. 15 to adopt a position of support, if amended, for H.R. 4624, the Muhammad Ali American Boxing Revival Act, contingent on adding a state mechanism to adjust minimum purses and minimum insurance requirements for inflation.

Commissioner Grewell moved the motion on behalf of the subcommittee that reviewed stakeholder input; the motion, which asked the commission to "adopt a position of support if amended on H.R. 4624 ... contingent upon inclusion of a mechanism for a state level cost of living adjustment to both the minimum purse and the minimum insurance requirements," was seconded and passed 6‑0. Commissioners recorded their votes on the record as: Hendrickson — aye; Fiore — aye; Dr. DeMars — aye; Grewell — aye; Dr. Williams — aye; Chairman Peter Villegas — aye.

Why it mattered: commissioners and the subcommittee emphasized measures they said would raise the baseline protections for fighters nationwide while preserving choice for individual athletes. "Options are always good options," said John McCarthy, a longtime participant in professional combat sports, during public comment. Subcommittee members reported broad agreement among stakeholders for requiring medical insurance covering training camps and a minimum payment per round; they also said many stakeholders raised concerns about contract length, pay transparency and the potential for anti‑competitive outcomes under a Unified Boxing Organization (UBO) model.

What the subcommittee reported: Commissioner Grewell and Commissioner DeMars told the commission they had met repeatedly with promoters, fighters and medical and anti‑doping experts. The commissioners said there was near‑universal support among those they spoke with for minimum medical coverage during training, and near‑universal support for some form of a minimum purse per round. They also relayed disagreement on whether a UBO would create monopoly power or instead expand opportunities: "There wasn't a clear consensus on that," the subcommittee reported. The subcommittee opposed a mandatory pregnancy‑testing requirement, which several members characterized as a privacy concern.

Public testimony: Public comment was extensive and sharply divided. Supporters included Nick Khan, who identified himself as president of WWE and a TKO board member, and defended the bill as an additional option for fighters and a way to bring more bouts to California. John McCarthy told commissioners, "Options are always good options." Medical and testing experts urged stronger anti‑doping provisions; Dr. Daniel Leichner, president and laboratory director of the Sports Medicine Research and Testing Laboratory, called for modern, out‑of‑competition no‑notice testing programs.

Opponents included current and former fighters and representatives of the Mixed Martial Arts Fighters Association and other groups, who warned that the UBO model risks promoter control of titles, rankings and fighters' bargaining power. A 17‑year‑old amateur who identified himself as Gabriel told the commission, "This bill is a slap in the face," and said the proposal would "circumvent the Ali Act." Several speakers asked that the subcommittee publish its minutes and materials and said more outreach to fighter associations was needed.

Additional clarifications and numbers cited during public comment: academic testimony urged indexing federal minimums to the Consumer Price Index; Dr. Rudy Mondragon cited research indicating that roughly 84 percent of fights in California (2013–2021) were 4, 6 and 8 round bouts and recommended scheduled reviews. Several commenters referenced a reported TKO settlement and ongoing litigation; speakers also described proposed minimum insurance amounts and pay schedules that they said should be indexed to inflation.

Next steps and staff direction: After the vote, Commissioner Grewell asked staff to return at a future meeting with specific recommendations on practices by sanctioning bodies — including ranking criteria, possible caps on sanctioning fees and how to treat belt fees — that the commission could address under California authority. Chairman Villegas closed public comment and moved the meeting into closed session.

Votes and formal action: The commission recorded a single formal motion (mover: Commissioner Grewell; second: recorded) to support H.R. 4624 if amended to include a state cost‑of‑living mechanism for minimum purses and insurance; the motion passed 6‑0.

Note on scope and authority: Commissioners and staff repeatedly noted that many provisions in the bill would operate at the federal level and through private organizations; the commission's role, they said, is limited to issuing a position and, where applicable, regulating activities that occur in California under state jurisdiction.