Congress Examines Pro Sports on Streaming Platforms, Questions Need for Antitrust Exemptions

The bipartisan U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary recently came together to hold a hearing and examine the migration of sports from broadcast TV to streaming platforms and the consumer impacts of this trend. The committee also penned an interim staff report titled "The Sports Broadcasting Act: A Special-Interest Antitrust Exemption Gone Awry." The committee expressed concerns about rising consumer costs as sports content is scattered across streaming platforms and placed behind paywalls. It also examined whether the Sports Broadcasting Act (SBA) – a law passed in 1961 that allows professional sports leagues to collectively pool and sell individual teams' broadcasting rights without antitrust liability – is working as the U.S. Congress intended or even still necessary in today's media marketplace.

Both the committee report and June 10, 2026, hearing, titled "Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust on the Sports Broadcasting Act," pondered similar questions.

Does the SBA Continue to Serve the Public?

Rep. Scott Fitzgerald (R-Wis.), who chaired the SBA hearing, explained that in 1961, Congress originally intended the SBA exemption to bolster professional sports leagues while also preserving free public access to sports broadcasts for fans. In other words, the SBA's limited antitrust exemption allowing professional sports leagues to collectively pool and sell broadcast rights was intended to preserve broad consumer access rather than facilitate market restrictions.

With the evolution from broadcast TV to digital streaming, Chairman Fitzgerald contemplated whether the SBA is currently helping or hindering consumers given the modern media markets and distribution models. Some witnesses argued that the leagues' ability to pool and sell broadcast rights may be reinforcing concentration among a handful of major platforms and that doing so only increases consumer cost to simply watch every game of a favorite team throughout the whole season. Witnesses suggested this may disproportionately affect lower-income households, rural consumers and older viewers, reflecting the unintended consequences of allowing collective rights sales without updated guardrails.

Is the SBA Inadvertently Fostering Streaming Exclusivity?

The migration of routine and marquee sporting events to exclusive streaming platforms raised significant concerns among committee members and hearing witnesses alike. Witnesses testified that leagues leverage their pooled rights to sign exclusive agreements with dominant digital platforms, potentially foreclosing competition from smaller broadcasters.

Members scrutinized the major leagues, asking whether the use of pooled rights and market allocation practices suppress competition and limit consumer access. Chairman Fitzgerald highlighted examples where fans were unable to view their local teams without purchasing premium packages, raising concerns about how leagues define and enforce local market boundaries. Some witnesses suggested that these practices may artificially segment the market, restrict alternative distribution pathways and reinforce the league's leverage over both broadcasters and consumers.

Is the SBA Still Needed for Professional Sports Leagues?

Lastly, members questioned whether leagues – which currently receive licensing revenue in the billions – still need an antitrust exception at all. Said another way, the question became whether individual professional sports teams possess sufficient market power to sustain competitive balance on their own (or whether doing so would favor large market teams over smaller ones, as boosting small-market teams was part of the rationale for the 1961 act).

Though the hearing witnesses provided some answers to these questions, this inquiry seems far from over, and the report simply tees up questions for further congressional review. Whether doing so means repeal or modifications to the SBA remains to be seen, but it seems safe to say that Congress will continue to evaluate the SBA in light of the 2026 media market realities rather than the conditions present in 1961.

For more information or questions navigating the House Judiciary Committee's inquiry into sports and media issues, including potential updates to the SBA, please contact the authors.

Information contained in this alert is for the general education and knowledge of our readers. It is not designed to be, and should not be used as, the sole source of information when analyzing and resolving a legal problem, and it should not be substituted for legal advice, which relies on a specific factual analysis. Moreover, the laws of each jurisdiction are different and are constantly changing. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. If you have specific questions regarding a particular fact situation, we urge you to consult the authors of this publication, your Holland & Knight representative or other competent legal counsel.