Here’s the “quick version” of the Gonzalez Name/Image/Likeness bill introduced in the House of Representatives on 9/24:
No school or athletic organization (e.g. NCAA) can ban someone from participating in college sports just because they have endorsement deals or have hired an agent to handle their endorsement deals. (Apparently, hiring an agent to deal with pro sports teams would still not be allowed.) However, the athlete can be banned by the school or organization from endorsing any of the following: tobacco, vaping/E-cigarettes, alcohol, marijuana (including dispensaries), “adult services,” and gambling sites/sportsbooks/casinos. Also, the athlete can be prevented from wearing any logo of an endorsed item/service while actually in a game or “university-sponsored event.”
No state may make or enforce its own name/image/likeness laws.
Schools are banned from paying their own athletes for endorsement deals, but at the same time, they cannot threaten to remove or reduce the scholarship of any athlete that accepts an endorsement deal from anyone.
A “booster” (defined as a person or organization that “provides substantial financial assistance or services” to the school or promotes the team “for its own financial interest”) may not offer any athlete or recruit anything of value in order to get the athlete to go to/stay at the school.
There’s something about a 13-member panel appointed by Congress, but it doesn’t seem to do very much other than make reports that suggest, among other things, more categories of banned items for endorsements.
I don’t think this is going to get out of committee; there just isn’t time (it would have to be passed by both the House and Senate by January 2). However, Sports Illustrated reports that there are a number of other bills being worked on; I am guessing these will be introduced when the new Congress starts in early January. Somebody feels that something needs to be done before Florida’s law takes effect on July 1.