The U.S. Department of Education says that Title IX does not apply to Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) payments. This reverses Biden-era guidance that equired schools to distribute direct NIL payments equitably between male and female athletes.
This decision means that schools can allocate NIL payments without considering gender equity.
Practically, this means that most of the $20.5 million in annual athlete compensation (from the NCAA’s House antitrust settlement) will go to football and men’s basketball players.
🧐 Is this a big deal or much ado about nothing❓
The Trump administration’s reasoning is that NIL payments are market-driven compensation, not financial aid, and therefore fall outside Title IX’s requirement that schools provide equal athletic financial assistance to male and female athletes.
They’re not wrong. The heart of NIL is that athletes receive compensation based on individual brand value. Individual brand value is market driven. Requiring NIL payments to comply with Title IX impedes an individual’s ability to maximize their market value.
🤷🏻♂️ Now What?
1️⃣ Colleges can distribute NIL payments however they choose*—without being required to ensure proportional support for women’s athletics.
2️⃣ Most of the money will likely go to football and men’s basketball players, which makes sense since these sports generate the bulk of athletic department revenue.
This decision is part of a broader push by the Trump administration to reshape Title IX enforcement. It follows recent actions on transgender athletes in women’s sports, changes to campus sexual misconduct regulations, and ongoing investigations into potential Title IX violations at several universities.
Title IX did not intend to regulate athlete compensation. Forcing schools to split NIL money equally undermines the newly established free-market dynamics in college sports.