Name, image and likeness supporters may have a potential new advocate:&nbspthe Trump administration. A White Home spokesman told CBS Sports this week the Trump administration is evaluating no matter whether “it would be suitable for the federal government to turn into involved with policy solutions” with regards to the fair treatment of college athletes.

CBS Sports sought comment from the administration following two sources mentioned there had been at least one particular meeting in between the Trump White House and men and women involved in creating name, image and likeness rights for athletes.

“The White Property wants to make positive NCAA student-athletes are treated fairly without harming the integrity of college sports,” stated Judd Deere, White Home deputy press secretary, when asked about that meeting. “Administration officials are in the method of understanding about these concerns, as effectively studying if it would be suitable for the federal government to grow to be involved with policy solutions.”

Deere, who is also unique assistant to the President, stated he would not comment additional.

“It really is very real,” stated a source familiar with the scenario concerning the interest among the two parties.

All of this comes at a time when the NCAA appears to be in search of federal intervention in figuring out how to implement name, image and likeness rights. California has passed a law that will take impact in 2023. Currently, at least 16 other states are developing bills. Florida’s law may be the most advanced at this point. It is scheduled to be ratified in April and take effect July 1.

Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith said there could be “chaos” if Florida enacts the law at the very same time the NCAA is still figuring out its path on name, image and likeness.

“Florida’s in the SEC. What does that mean to the other SEC schools [if Florida athletes have these rights]?” Smith asked not too long ago.

The California bill has a far more liberalized compensation component than the Florida bill.

“If you have seven states with different laws and those states are operating within those laws due to the fact they have to, I do not know what that signifies,” Smith added. “Envision if California didn’t perform with us to alter the [efficient] date to 2023 and it was 2020. What would Oregon do? What would Arizona State do? What does the Pac-12 do?

“That is the chaos that could take place.”

Even though it really is not clear who from either side is involved in the talks, the NCAA does not seem to be involved in these particular discussions with the White Residence described above.

“State governments and the federal government don’t want to talk to the NCAA,” said a high-ranking source in a state contemplating such legislation. “But they do want to talk to the conferences. The schools and the conferences … that is the ones they want to hear from. Conference leaders nonetheless have credibility.”

NCAA president Mark Emmert met with legislators in December in Washington, D.C. following decades of the association fighting any type of federal government intervention into its affairs.

At the time Emmert mentioned he spoke to White House officials “who don’t seem opposed to the notion” of name, image and likeness rights. The NCAA Board of Governors in October directed the membership to commence exploring alterations enabling athletes to “benefit from” their name, image and likeness.

“We appreciate the interest of the White House and administration officials and share their interest in producing confident that student-athletes are treated fairly with out harming the integrity of college sports,” said Emmert on Friday when contacted by CBS Sports. “We look forward to continuing our dialogue with them.”

What all of this looks like going forward remains murky. NCAA guidelines continue to limit athletes to the scholarship basics: books, board, tuition, charges and price of attendance. They also have access to dedicated academic rewards such as tutoring. Bylaw changes have also allowed enhanced meal alternatives that mean athletes can get 3 square meals a day from the education table.

Those guidelines do not permit athletes to profit from such outside benefits as autograph signings, industrial endorsements and group licensing agreements. Such possibilities would be the initial exploited if name, image and likeness rights are granted.

While the NCAA is open to what would be radical change to the so-known as “collegiate model,” it can not figure out precisely how to do it.

In January, Emmert said that Board of Governors formed a group of school presidents to answer a standard query: What does the NCAA want out of possible federal intervention on the problem?

Any formal federal legislation would have to go by way of the usual pipeline. A bill would have to be submitted, then vetted by both the House of Representatives and Senate prior to becoming signed by the President.

Wisconsin chancellor Rebecca Blank expressed her doubt federal intervention whilst speaking to the school’s athletic board last week.

“I will tell you why we’ve never ever gone to federal legislation prior to: Once you go to the feds, the legislature and the Congress and say, ‘Hey, we’d like you to write some legislation for us.’ They have their own ideas,” Blank was quoted as saying in the Wisconsin State Journal. “And not all of their suggestions, in my mind, are completely sane and would make sense for college athletics.”

Smith is also co-chair of a operating group that is expected to present recommendations to the Board of Governors on name, image and likeness rights in April. By the end of the month, the NCAA could be advancing the initiative to ask Congress to develop overarching legislation. If not, these states are prepared to step in with laws that could stoke a legal battle among the NCAA and state governments.

“There is something to be mentioned about chaos. It is not like the end of the planet. It may in fact assist make the case,” said former Maryland Congressman Tom McMillen.

McMillen pointed out that the NCAA would have problems getting injunctions stopping name, image and likeness laws popping up in a number of states in a quick time span. State and federal intervention in the debate has turn out to be so attractive due to the fact it is a bipartisan issue. Politicians can sell the name, image and likeness rights cause to their constituents as student-athlete welfare.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has supported the Florida bill sponsored by Florida Rep. Chip LaMarca. Each are Republicans.

“It really is challenging to understate the significance,” said South Florida lawyer Darren Heitner, who helped create the Florida bill. “It’s huge. The reality that you have a Republican governor and Republican sponsor of the legislation, a bill that is largely assumed to be something that is element of a liberalist agenda [is optimistic].”