Wisconsin's High School NIL Vote Is Key Decision for WIAA's Future

Next month, the Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association (WIAA) will vote on allowing high school athletes to receive name, image, and likeness endorsement opportunities.
With 38 states and the District of Columbia already allowing prep athletes to monetize their influence, Wisconsin is one of the last remaining jurisdictions to limit high school athletes’ earning opportunities.
Roughly one year ago, the WIAA introduced a proposition that would have allowed NIL at the high school level with specific prohibitions on certain NIL activities — the rule change was defeated in a 170-219 vote.
At the collegiate level, where NIL is most prominent, regulations are driven by state law. However, most states omit any mention of high school athletics in their NIL legislation, leaving regulation to the state’s respective high school athletic association.
Wisconsin is one of 16 states without active NIL legislation at the state level, similarly leaving high school NIL decision-making in the hands of its athletic association.
Even without an NIL law in the Badger State, NCAA policy allows student-athletes from in-state colleges like the University of Wisconsin and Marquette to participate in NIL opportunities.
The WIAA annual meeting is scheduled for April 25, and this year’s NIL initiative will receive a final vote. Much has changed in the last year regarding NIL compensation at the high school level, including 10 new states allowing prep athlete compensation since the WIAA’s previous vote.
According to sources contacted by Wisconsin Public Radio, state legislators are preparing to introduce a bill that would supersede the authority of the WIAA and grant high school athletes the right to participate in endorsement deals if the initiative is once again defeated.
State lawmakers’ involvement puts WIAA voters in a tough spot.
Even if they oppose NIL for high school athletes, passing the initiative could help them retain regulatory control. The WIAA has a clear interest in NIL regulation, and appeasing lawmakers could allow it to draft policies on its own terms rather than having an external framework imposed.
State high school athletic associations’ rules regarding NIL endorsements vary widely, and maintaining drafting control could move the needle for many WIAA voters.
The WIAA may wish to pass restricted NIL categories similar to rules in other states.
For example, the Florida High School Athletic Association expressly prohibits any high school student-athlete from entering into an NIL contract with NIL collectives.
Even if the WIAA passes the NIL referendum, the state can still override its authority.
In Missouri, the MSHSAA introduced a very limited high school NIL policy, which was later overruled by the state. While high school athletes in Missouri are generally restricted from most NIL activations, state legislators passed a carveout allowing any athlete committed to an in-state university to participate in endorsement opportunities — a strategic move to keep top athletes within state lines.
With the tide turning toward NIL for high school athletes, the WIAA faces a pivotal decision.
A second rejection of NIL could prompt state intervention, stripping the association of its authority and forcing it to accept a framework it did not design.
Either way, NIL in Wisconsin high school sports is no longer a question of if — but when and how.