The House Judiciary Committee hearing on whether major sports leagues, the NFL in particular, benefit consumers or are violating the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 by funneling games behind increasingly expensive paywalls, was a one-sided debate.During the two-hour hearing, Republicans and Democrats on the committee did something rarely seen in Washington, D.C.these days: They mostly agreed.Then another rare sight, as if seeing one unicorn wasn't enough ...
the witnesses invited to testify all came at the issue pretty much on the same side and they were generally not interrupted by committee members eager to reclaim their time.SCATHING JUDICIARY COMMITTEE REPORT ACCUSES NFL OF STRETCHING ANTITRUST EXEMPTIONNFL Commissioner Roger Goodell stands with the Vince Lombardi Trophy after the Seattle Seahawks vs.New England Patriots game at Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara, California, on Feb.
8, 2026.(Simon Bruty/Sports Illustrated via Getty Images)It was like watching an All-Pro team bulldoze a roster of undrafted free agents who decided not to step on the field.And the NFL was the latter in this scenario because Commissioner Roger Goodell was invited to testify but declined.
And the league didn't have anyone advocating on its behalf.When Fox News Digital reached out to the NFL after the hearing to request its side of the matter, there was no response.The NFL went dark on all matters relative to this important hearing.And the sense here is the league may come to regret going mute because the calls to stop it from diverting its games onto pay streaming services were loud behind microphones.
The consumer complaints about rising prices for watching games on those streaming sites were multifold and unopposed.NAB COMMISSIONER BACKS FRUSTRATED AMERICAN SPORTS FANS AS LEAGUES PIVOT TO STREAMING SERVICESSo, the NFL got routed on this afternoon on Capitol Hill.Rep.Scott Fitzgerald, R-Wis., leaves a meeting of the House Republican Conference at the Capitol Hill Club on Feb.
28, 2...