Discussion · Senate
Cory A. Booker Democrat
“I oppose this bill. College athletes have been winning their rights in court, but this bill would stop them from suing. It helps wealthy colleges, not the athletes.”
“She is talking about enshrining in law this idea of revenue sharing. Time and time again, even to the Supreme Court, when conservative Justices joined with Justices appointed by Democrats, they have affirmed college athletes’ power. They have gotten power through the courts. What this does is it heads off their legal abilities by enshrining these laws. ``Let it play out in the courts’’ is what every athlete organization is saying. Why are you trying to suddenly be concerned about college athletes and enshrine things that we are winning in court case after court case. This is the hypocrisy here. For years and years and years, I have watched my own image on Madden’s video game--my own image--and never got paid for that. And now athletes bring it to the courts and win, time and time again? And now my colleague says: Oh, we want to rush and help athletes. That is why the colleges and wealthy donors are really excited about this bill. It is because it is going to make sure that the future lawsuits are cut off, that they have all the antitrust exemptions. Why do you think you see that the trial lawyers organizations and others who have been representing college athletes in getting them some modicum of justice are not in favor of this bill? That is rich. We don’t need your help. Athletes groups don’t need your help. They don’t want it. They haven’t asked for it. But yet, somehow, you think you are helping them, but who you are helping are the wealthy colleges. Are there any other questions before I move on to my remarks about AI?”
-
Speech in the House
Signal 42 of 100
Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.
See full analysis
She is talking about enshrining in law this idea of revenue sharing. Time and time again, even to the Supreme Court, when conservative Justices joined with Justices appointed by Democrats, they have affirmed college athletes’ power. They have gotten power through the courts. What this does is it heads off their legal abilities by enshrining these laws. ``Let it play out in the courts’’ is what every athlete organization is saying. Why are you trying to suddenly be concerned about college athletes and enshrine things that we are winning in court case after court case. This is the hypocrisy here. For years and years and years, I have watched my own image on Madden’s video game--my own image--and never got paid for that. And now athletes bring it to the courts and win, time and time again? And now my colleague says: Oh, we want to rush and help athletes. That is why the colleges and wealthy donors are really excited about this bill. It is because it is going to make sure that the future lawsuits are cut off, that they have all the antitrust exemptions. Why do you think you see that the trial lawyers organizations and others who have been representing college athletes in getting them some modicum of justice are not in favor of this bill? That is rich. We don’t need your help. Athletes groups don’t need your help. They don’t want it. They haven’t asked for it. But yet, somehow, you think you are helping them, but who you are helping are the wealthy colleges. Are there any other questions before I move on to my remarks about AI?