Senators approve lifting NIL restrictions on SC colleges after gun debate puts bill in timeout

COLUMBIA – Senators intercepted the pass Tuesday on legislation that united Tigers and Gamecocks. A bill allowing colleges to represent student athletes in personal branding and sponsorship deals was sidelined over something seemingly unrelated — guns.

But on Wednesday, senators rallied and passed the bill 26-16, without any restrictions on gun sponsorships. The tally was an unusual mix, with 14 Democrats and 12 Republicans voting for the measure and all 16 “no” votes from Republicans.

Head coaches from the University of South Carolina and Clemson University, as well as Coastal Carolina University, had asked legislators to pass a state law overriding NCAA rules that restrict schools’ involvement in these types of deals.

The NCAA in July 2021 opened the door for athletes to earn money off their “name, image and likeness” but provided few guidelines at the time, aside from saying universities could not pay athletes directly or tie these branding deals to attendance or athletic performance. The lack of guidance left colleges in a legal limbo and led to numerous states passing their own laws governing the practice.

Football coaches Shane Beamer and Dabo Swinney sat side-by-side in February and told lawmakers such a move would empower colleges to protect student athletes from being swindled as they navigate these often complex “name, image and likeness” (NIL) contracts. The House then passed the bill unanimously.

Since then, the NCAA did adopt new rules for Division I athletes that permit colleges to provide NIL assistance and services, such as helping athletes find NIL opportunities and facilitating deals. Colleges still cannot compensate athletes — neither directly nor indirectly — and they can’t use it in recruiting efforts.

Still, coaches have warned lawmakers that without legislative clarity, South Carolina could be at a disadvantage when it comes to keeping and recruiting athletes.

The legislation bobbed and weaved its way through the Statehouse only to be tackled on the one-yard line — by a gun debate.

The Senate initially adopted an amendment to the bill Tuesday that would have barred college athletes from signing marketing deals involving alcohol, illegal drugs, steroids, tobacco and nicotine products, gambling, adult entertainment and weapons.

But the last word in that sentence got the attention of avid guns rights supporter Sen. Shane Martin, a chief backer of the permit-less carry law that passed earlier this year.

He opposed not letting college athletes advertise guns, putting the entire debate on pause.

The Spartanburg County Republican said guns should not be among items college athletes are prohibited to market. He pointed to the fact that many of the colleges have shooting teams whose athletes gun companies may approach for sponsorship.

Senate Minority Leader Brad Hutto countered that he doesn’t want to see a star quarterback in an ad holding up a Glock telling fans they should get one too.

“These student athletes are idolized by other kids,” said Hutto, D-Orangeburg. “It’s the 12-year-old kid that looks up to the 19-year-old quarterback and decides what to do.”

Meanwhile, Hutto said, news reports of young teenagers involved in shootings in the state have been numerous over the past several years. He said police in his district struggle to stop youth from getting involved in gun violence.

“These (college) athletes sacrifice a lot and I appreciate that,” Hutto said. “I’m not opposed to them getting a little extra money. But we have to draw the line somewhere.”

When it appeared that the GOP-controlled Senate was poised to approve deleting the last word, allowing for gun sponsorships and ads, Sen. Darrell Jackson, D-Hopkins, logged his objection. Senate rules allow a single senator to hold up legislation. The move put the bill on life support, with just two working days left in the legislative session.

But on Wednesday, supporters mustered enough votes to overcome his objection and pass the bill without the gun prohibition.

The bill still prevents students from earning money by endorsing tobacco, alcohol, illegal drugs or gambling. It says nothing about guns. However, it does allow universities to bar students from endorsing any product that “conflicts with institutional values as defined by the institution of higher learning.”

The amended bill returns to the House, which could vote Thursday to send it to the governor’s desk.

The NCAA has lobbied Congress to pass national NIL standards to no avail. That’s led to states enacting their own legislation, which has at times flown in the face of the NCAA’s wishes.

In Virginia, for example, the state has allowed colleges to pay student athletes directly when using their names and images in marketing materials.

It is unclear how hard NCAA will fight in court against state laws that violate its own rules.

With a lack of initial guidance from the NCAA, so-called collectives – entities that pool money from boosters and fans of a specific college to aid that school’s athletes with inking sponsorships – stepped in to fill the void. Most top athletic programs now have an affiliate collective. While separate from the university, it works with the school’s athletes.

South Carolina’s proposal would have allowed the state’s schools to bring their affiliated collectives’ operations in-house. It also would offer South Carolina colleges protections from NCAA sanctions.

Reporter Abraham Kenmore contributed to this report.

Editor’s note: This article was updated Wednesday, May 8, to reflect that the Senate renewed debate and passed the bill.