Katie Uhlaender: Athletes risk paying the price if Protect College Sports Act is passed
The US Olympic and Paralympic Committee has emailed athletes urging them to support the proposed Protect College Sports Act (PCSA), which is being promoted as legislation to safeguard college sports. In this opinion piece for OutKick, former Olympian Katie Uhlaender questions this framing, arguing that the bill may not protect athletes at all and could instead leave them worse off if it becomes law.
The piece appears alongside related coverage of a recent Supreme Court ruling on Title IX, referenced by plaintiffs involved in lawsuits brought by Riley Gaines against the NCAA and Brooke Slusser against the Mountain West Conference, both concerning fairness in women's college sports. The article text provided is incomplete, cutting off before Uhlaender fully details her specific objections to the PCSA or explains precisely how athletes might be affected.
- USOPC asked athletes to back the Protect College Sports Act
- Uhlaender warns the bill may harm, not protect, athletes
- Comes amid Title IX legal battles involving NCAA and Mountain West
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of the Protect College Sports Act argue that decades of piecemeal litigation have left college athletics in a state of chronic instability, with conferences and schools unable to plan long-term because any rule on eligibility, transfers or compensation can be challenged in court. They contend that a targeted antitrust exemption would allow the NCAA and its member institutions to negotiate uniform, sustainable standards, including revenue-sharing frameworks, that protect the viability of non-revenue and Olympic sports which might otherwise be cut. In their view, a stable legal footing serves the broader interests of the majority of student-athletes, even if it means some individual legal avenues are narrowed.
The case against
Opponents, including Katie Uhlaender, argue that shielding the NCAA from antitrust scrutiny removes one of the few effective checks on an organisation with a long history of restricting athlete compensation and mobility, leaving athletes with less recourse against rules they consider unfair. They further warn that provisions affecting Title IX protections could weaken enforcement of gender equity in college sports at a moment when women's athletics have made significant gains. For these critics, the values at stake are accountability and individual rights, and they hold that any move to consolidate the NCAA's authority should not come at the expense of athletes' legal standing to challenge it.