Muhammad Ali’s name still carries enormous weight in combat sports. It symbolizes independence, commitment, and a fighter’s freedom to control his own destiny. That is why his grandson, Nico Ali Walsh, is outraged that lawmakers are attaching Ali’s legacy to legislation that he says contradicts what “The Greatest” stood for.
Watch What’s Trending Now!
And he didn’t hold back, as Walsh used some stern words to criticize the proposed Muhammad Ali American Boxing Revival Act online.
“The Ali Revival Act is really an Ali reversal act,” he wrote on X. “It will end the era of fights like the ones we’re watching today.”
When a fan questioned why Ali’s name was tied to the legislation in the first place, Walsh’s answer was blunt.
“It’s for branding,” he replied. “They’ll use his name but never the principles behind it.”
It’s for branding. They’ll use his name but never the principles behind it.
His reply cuts deep because in Nico Ali Walsh’s opinion, this is not about honoring Muhammad Ali; instead, it is about using his image to promote something that undermines the fighter protections his name helped inspire.
That’s where the real fight begins. The bill, backed by TKO Group Holdings, the parent company of the Ultimate Fighting Championship, WWE, and Zuffa Boxing, would allow the formation of Unified Boxing Organizations, potentially giving one system enormous control over promotion, rankings, titles, and matchmaking. A move that Dana White endorses as necessary to ‘save’ boxing.
“The Ali Act was built on a simple principle,” Walsh said at Wednesday’s U.S. Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing in Washington. “The people controlling fighters should not also control the entire marketplace those fighters depend on. The separation exists to prevent conflicts of interest and exploitation.
“The new Muhammad Ali Boxing Revival Act would undermine that principle by allowing one entity to operate across promotion, management, and matchmaking. It removes independence.”
According to him, America is now flirting with the very centralized model that many fighters have long opposed in the UFC—one in which pay is tightly controlled, sponsorship freedom is limited, and athletes wield significantly less power.
In that regard, Nico Ali Walsh’s outrage is not primarily about legislation. It’s about legacy, since he believes Muhammad Ali’s principles are being used as branding while being quietly abandoned in practice.
However, as per Nick Khan, the move will only bring more money into the sport, a claim that former six-division champion turned boxing promoter Oscar De La Hoya and Nico Ali Walsh spoke out against.
Oscar De La Hoya and Nico Ali Walsh slam TKO’s claim
That is also why Oscar De La Hoya and Nico Ali Walsh were quick to reject Nick Khan’s claim that the Ali Revival Act would just increase boxing revenue. That sales pitch sounds similar to them because they’ve seen what a centralized combat sports system looks like under TKO Group Holdings, and they don’t think boxers should want that future.
To double down on his point, De La Hoya pointed directly at the business model of the Dana White-led promotion.
“The UFC and its parent company agreed to a $375 million antitrust settlement after fighters accused them of suppressing wages and restricting competition,” De La Hoya said.
Nico Ali Walsh further added his critique of the UFC to debunk Nick Khan’s claims.
“Boxing is not broken,” Ali Walsh added. “If it were, UFC champions—at the height of their careers—would not be actively targeting boxing fights because of the fair pay. That movement is rarely seen in reverse due to the UFC’s centralized pay structure.
“Boxing has never been perfect, but one of its strengths has always been competition. Multiple promoters competing for fighters creates leverage and fair market value. When that competition is consolidated to one system, that leverage disappears.”
And that is the fundamental fear driving all of this. If boxing becomes overly centralized, fighters may gain structure but lose flexibility, negotiating power, sponsorship opportunities, and the sport’s long-standing distinctiveness.
Walsh sees this as a direct betrayal of what his grandfather Muhammad Ali represented: athletes having control over their own worth. So, although TKO talks about development and investment, its critics hear something different—a polished promise that may ultimately leave fighters richer in exposure, but poorer in power.
