Department of Justice Looks Into NFL Media Contracts

The U.S. Department of Justice is investigating the NFL amid concerns that its media agreements may violate antitrust laws and adversely affect consumers.

At the center of this regulatory scrutiny is the 1961 Sports Broadcasting Act, which afforded NFL teams limited antitrust exemptions to negotiate national broadcast deals.

In February, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) initiated its own investigation into sports rights, including those of the NFL. Lawmakers and regulators have expressed frustration that fans must increasingly subscribe to multiple streaming services to watch games. According to the FCC Media Bureau, by 2025, games are expected to be available on ten different services and networks, with total estimated costs for consumers exceeding $1,500 to access all games.

In response to inquiries, the NFL defended its media distribution strategy, stating, “The NFL’s media distribution model is the most fan and broadcaster-friendly in the entire sports and entertainment industry. With over 87% of our games on free, broadcast television, including 100% of games in the markets of the competing teams, the NFL has for decades put our fans front and center in how we distribute our content. The 2025 season was our most viewed since 1989 and reflects the strength of the NFL distribution model and its wide availability to all fans.”

Watch on Deadline

The Wall Street Journal first reported the investigation, noting it comes as the league considers reopening its media deals to secure higher payments. In 2022, the NFL signed a set of 11-year agreements with Fox, Paramount, Disney, NBCUniversal, and Amazon, reportedly generating a total of $110 billion.

The impending merger of Paramount with Skydance in 2025 will trigger a change-of-control clause, allowing the NFL to renegotiate its media agreements following the 2029-30 season. Experts anticipate that new contracts will be significantly more expensive for media partners, given the NFL’s ongoing dominance at a time when viewership for non-sports programming has diminished.

Since finalizing these broadcast-heavy deals, the league has also placed a portion of its schedule on Netflix and YouTube, while Amazon and NBCUniversal have secured exclusive streaming games.

Federal regulations stipulate that local markets of participating teams must allow local broadcast stations to carry the same live telecast as the streaming service.

Senator Mike Lee, a Republican and chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy, and Consumer Rights, highlighted the evolving landscape since the approval of the antitrust exemption. He has urged the DOJ and Federal Trade Commission to investigate the NFL, stating, “The modern distribution environment differs substantially from the conditions that precipitated this exemption. Instead of a small number of free broadcast networks, the NFL now licenses games simultaneously to subscription streaming platforms, premium cable networks, and technology companies operating under different business models. To the extent collectively licensed game packages are placed behind subscription paywalls, these arrangements may no longer align with the statutory concept outlined in the 1961 legislation.”

Brendan Carr, the chairman of the FCC, also addressed the issue of sports rights accessibility in a social media post earlier this year. “For decades, Americans enjoyed turning on their TV & quickly finding the game they wanted to see,” he remarked. “Yet watching your favorite team play isn’t as easy these days. Many games are still on broadcast, but an increasing number are on a range of different online platforms.”