PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Fuller, Clay [R-GA-14] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 22, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10266 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10266 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10266 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10266 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-03 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
This proposal would require colleges participating in federal student aid programs to keep athletes with professional sports contracts from varsity participation in the same sport. Violations could put a college’s participation in those aid programs at risk. Athletics officials who knowingly recruit or sign such athletes could also face criminal penalties, subject to specified conditions. Agreements solely for use of an athlete’s name, image or likeness and direct college payments would be excluded from the professional-contract definition. The supplied evidence describes a proposal, not an enacted law.
The institution will not permit an individual whom the institution knows, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should know, is a professional athlete
shall be subject to the limitation, suspension, and termination procedures, and other remedies, available to the Secretary under that part.
It shall be unlawful for a covered athletics official knowingly to recruit, offer to enroll, sign to a National Letter of Intent or substantially equivalent instrument, certify the eligibility of, or otherwise cause to compete in intercollegiate athletics competition, an individual whom the official knows to be a professional athlete
The term does not include— (i) an agreement relating solely to the use of an individual’s name, image, or likeness that does not obligate the individual to render athletic services to a professional sports team, league, club, or organization; or (ii) compensation paid to the individual directly by a covered institution
2026-09-03: Introduced in House
Section 1 names the proposal the NEAUX PROS Act.
This Act may be cited as the No Elite Athletes Using X-pro status to ensure Prioritizing Recruitment Of Student-athletes (NEAUX PROS) Act.
The proposed findings say simultaneous professional and college participation may disadvantage athletes without professional contracts. This is the bill’s stated rationale, not evidence that the predicted disadvantage occurs.
Congress finds the following:
Permitting an individual under contract to a professional sports team, league, club, or organization in a given sport to also compete as a student-athlete in that same sport at an institution receiving Federal student assistance blurs the distinction between amateur and professional competition and may disadvantage student-athletes who are not also under professional contract.
The proposal would cover higher education institutions with federal student aid program participation agreements. It would apply to sports in which those institutions sponsor varsity teams.
The term covered institution means an institution of higher education (as defined in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002)) that has entered into a program participation agreement under section 487 of that Act (20 U.S.C. 1094).
The term covered sport means a sport in which a covered institution sponsors a varsity intercollegiate athletics team.
The Federal Government, through title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq.), provides substantial financial assistance to institutions of higher education
Covered varsity participation would include organized practice as well as competition against another college. An athlete would be covered whether or not they receive athletic financial aid.
The term intercollegiate athletics competition means participation, as a member of a varsity team representing a covered institution in a covered sport, in organized practice or competition against another institution of higher education, whether or not the individual receives athletically related student financial assistance.
A professional sports contract would mean a binding agreement, express or implied, with a professional team or other qualifying sports organization that entitles an athlete to salary, a signing bonus or other compensation for athletic services.
The term professional sports contract means a binding contract, express or implied, between an individual and a professional sports team, league, club, or other organization that organizes or sanctions professional-level competition in a sport, under which the individual is entitled to receive a salary, signing bonus, or other compensation in exchange for the individual’s athletic services in that sport.
An agreement solely allowing use of an athlete’s name, image or likeness would be excluded if it does not require athletic services for a professional organization. Direct payments from a covered college would also be excluded, including the specified permitted revenue-sharing payments.
The term does not include— (i) an agreement relating solely to the use of an individual’s name, image, or likeness that does not obligate the individual to render athletic services to a professional sports team, league, club, or organization; or (ii) compensation paid to the individual directly by a covered institution, including compensation paid under a revenue-sharing arrangement permitted under the settlement approved in In re College Athlete NIL Litigation (N.D. Cal.) or successor authority, or under any Federal statute enacted after the date of enactment of this Act that expressly authorizes such compensation without loss of intercollegiate athletics eligibility.
Professional-athlete status would depend on having a professional contract in the covered sport without having canceled it under the bill’s rules. To qualify for that cancellation exception, an athlete would have to cancel in writing before receiving any contract compensation or providing any athletic services, and notify both the college and the professional organization in writing.
The term professional athlete means, with respect to a covered sport, an individual who is a party to a professional sports contract for that covered sport and who has not rescinded that contract in accordance with section 5(a).
An individual who has entered into a professional sports contract for a covered sport is not a professional athlete for purposes of this Act with respect to that covered sport if, before receiving any compensation under the contract and before rendering any athletic services under the contract, the individual— (1) rescinds the contract in writing; and (2) provides written notice of the rescission to the covered institution at which the individual seeks to compete and to the professional sports team, league, club, or organization that was a party to the contract.
Covered athletics officials would include college employees or agents with authority to recruit, offer athletic aid, sign athletes to a National Letter of Intent or equivalent document, or certify eligibility. The definition would also cover people who knowingly direct or authorize others to take those actions.
The term covered athletics official means, with respect to a covered institution, an individual who, as an employee or agent of the covered institution (including a head coach, assistant coach, athletic director, general manager, or other athletics department staff member), has authority to recruit prospective student-athletes, extend an offer of athletically related student financial assistance, sign a prospective student-athlete to a National Letter of Intent or substantially equivalent instrument, or certify the eligibility of a student-athlete to compete in intercollegiate athletics competition, or who knowingly directs or authorizes another person to take any such action.
Section 4 would add a condition to federal student aid participation agreements: a college could not allow participation in the contracted sport when it knows, or should know through reasonable checking, that the individual is a professional athlete. The proposed condition references definitions under a different act title from the title in section 1.
Section 487(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1094(a)) is amended
The institution will not permit an individual whom the institution knows, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should know, is a professional athlete (as defined in section 3 of the Collegiate Amateur Athletics Protection Act of 2026) to compete in intercollegiate athletics competition (as so defined) in the covered sport in which the individual holds a professional sports contract.
This Act may be cited as the No Elite Athletes Using X-pro status to ensure Prioritizing Recruitment Of Student-athletes (NEAUX PROS) Act.
The Secretary of Education would have to issue guidance on how carefully colleges must check professional-athlete status. The guidance would also establish a process for colleges and covered officials to request a written status determination from the Department of Education.
The term Secretary means the Secretary of Education.
The Secretary shall issue guidance establishing— (1) standards for the diligence a covered institution is expected to exercise in determining whether a prospective or current student-athlete is a professional athlete for purposes of paragraph (30) of section 487(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as added by subsection (a); and (2) a process by which a covered institution or a covered athletics official may seek a written determination from the Department of Education regarding the status of a particular individual under that paragraph.
A college’s violation would be treated as a breach of its federal student aid participation agreement. Existing procedures for limiting, suspending or ending participation, along with other available remedies, would apply; the bill does not make termination automatic.
A violation of paragraph (30) of section 487(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as added by subsection (a), shall be treated as a violation of a program participation agreement for purposes of part G of title IV of that Act (20 U.S.C. 1094 et seq.), and shall be subject to the limitation, suspension, and termination procedures, and other remedies, available to the Secretary under that part.
Section 5 would delay the funding condition for athletes who, on enactment day, both hold a professional contract and participate in the same college sport. Their transition would last until the first day of their college’s first academic year beginning after enactment.
The amendment made by section 4(a) shall not apply with respect to an individual who, as of the date of enactment of this Act, is both a party to a professional sports contract for a covered sport and is competing in intercollegiate athletics competition in that covered sport, until the first day of the first academic year of the relevant covered institution that begins after the date of enactment of this Act.
The proposal would preserve eligibility to be selected in a professional draft and to negotiate a potential contract arising from that selection process. It would also preserve eligibility for name, image or likeness payments, except payments made under a professional sports contract as defined by the bill.
Nothing in this Act, or the amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to— (1) restrict the eligibility of an individual to be selected in, or to negotiate the terms of a potential contract arising from, a draft or other selection process conducted by a professional sports team, league, club, or organization; (2) affect the eligibility of an individual to receive compensation for the use of the individual’s name, image, or likeness, except to the extent such compensation is paid pursuant to a professional sports contract as defined in section 3
Colleges and their athletic associations or conferences could continue to adopt or enforce stricter eligibility rules.
Nothing in this Act, or the amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to—
(3) limit the authority of a covered institution, or of an athletic association or conference of which a covered institution is a member, to adopt or enforce eligibility rules more restrictive than the requirements of this Act
The proposal would not create a new right for private parties to sue. It would also preserve the availability of prosecution under other applicable federal criminal laws.
Nothing in this Act, or the amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to—
(4) create a private right of action against a covered institution, the Secretary, or any other person; or (5) affect the availability of prosecution under any other applicable Federal criminal statute, including sections 201, 224, 1001, 1341, and 1343 of title 18, United States Code.
Section 7 would create a criminal offense for a covered athletics official who knowingly recruits, offers enrollment to, signs, certifies eligibility for or otherwise causes participation by someone the official knows is a professional athlete. The act would have to affect interstate or foreign commerce, or the college would have to have received more than $10,000 in qualifying federal benefits during the preceding year.
It shall be unlawful for a covered athletics official knowingly to recruit, offer to enroll, sign to a National Letter of Intent or substantially equivalent instrument, certify the eligibility of, or otherwise cause to compete in intercollegiate athletics competition, an individual whom the official knows to be a professional athlete, if— (1) the recruitment, offer, signing, certification, or other act is in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce; or (2) the covered institution by which the official is employed, or for which the official acts as an agent, receives, in the 1-year period before the offense, benefits in excess of $10,000 under a Federal program involving a grant, contract, subsidy, loan, guarantee, insurance, or other form of Federal assistance.
The ordinary criminal penalty would be a fine, up to five years in prison, or both. The maximum prison term would rise to ten years if the violation was undertaken for financial gain or was part of a pattern of at least two violations; a fine could also apply.
(b) Penalty A person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. (c) Enhanced penalty A person who violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both, if the violation was undertaken for financial gain or was part of a pattern of 2 or more violations of subsection (a).
An accused official could raise a defense based on reasonable reliance on a written determination that the athlete was not a professional athlete, provided that determination had not been withdrawn or replaced when the conduct occurred. This provision also uses the different act title.
It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution under this section that the defendant reasonably relied on a written determination issued under section 4(b)(2) of the Collegiate Amateur Athletics Protection Act of 2026 that the individual was not a professional athlete, and that the determination had not been withdrawn or superseded at the time of the conduct at issue.
This Act may be cited as the No Elite Athletes Using X-pro status to ensure Prioritizing Recruitment Of Student-athletes (NEAUX PROS) Act.
The new criminal offense would apply only to individual covered athletics officials, not to colleges as organizations. Prosecution could take place in a federal judicial district where the college is located or where an act furthering the offense occurred.
(e) No institutional liability This section does not impose criminal liability on a covered institution as an organization. Liability under this section attaches only to an individual covered athletics official who violates subsection (a). (f) Venue A prosecution under this section may be brought in any judicial district in which the covered institution involved is located or in which any act in furtherance of the offense occurred.
The funding condition would generally start on the first day of each college’s first academic year beginning after enactment, subject to section 5’s transition provision. The criminal provisions would take effect on enactment day and apply only to conduct on or after that date.
(a) Funding condition Except as provided in section 5(b), the amendment made by section 4(a) shall take effect on the first day of the first academic year of a covered institution that begins after the date of enactment of this Act. (b) Criminal penalties Section 7, and the amendments made by that section, take effect on the date of enactment of this Act, and apply only to conduct occurring on or after that date.
If a provision or its application were held unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, section 9 would preserve the rest of the act and its application to other people or circumstances.
If any provision of this Act, or the application of a provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the remainder of this Act, and the application of that provision to any other person or circumstance, shall not be affected.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated September 22, 2026, records introduction in the House on September 3, 2026, and referral that day to the Education and Workforce and Judiciary committees for provisions within their respective jurisdictions.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-22T18:51:28Z.
2026-09-03: Introduced in House
2026-09-03: Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-03. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the contents of other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version; member requests, disclosures and committee or conference materials are not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit warranting a separate finding was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 22, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI