Wk5 1 hr4

720 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
720
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Wk5 1 hr4

  1. 1. <ul><li>REVIEW </li></ul><ul><li>REGULATING PARTICIPATION </li></ul><ul><ul><li>SPORT CLUBS (GENERAL CONSUMERS) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>SCHOOLS (ATHLETES) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DRUG TESTING (ATHLETES) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>WRAP-UP </li></ul>
  2. 2. <ul><li>AGENCY LAW </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Between principal and agent </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Formation of agency </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Express agency </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Implied agency </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Apparent agency </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ratification agency </li></ul></ul></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>LABOR RELATIONS </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Purpose: Achieving industry peace by maintaining power balance between corporations and unions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>National Labor Relations Act provides </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Establish an administrative agency (NLRB) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>How to unionize </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>What must be negotiated if union is certified </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>What are unfair labor practices </li></ul></ul></ul>
  4. 4. <ul><li>SPORT CLUBS </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Title VII of Civil Rights Act </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Not govern membership practices </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Only in employment </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>PR & marketing concerns </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Allegation of discriminatory policy is very damaging </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>May negatively affect current & future membership </li></ul></ul></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>SPORT CLUBS </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Prohibits intentional discrimination </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Based upon race, color, religion, or national origin </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>In places of public accommodation (e.g., public library, hotel, sport facilities) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Statutory exemption: If “truly private” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Sport clubs are exempted if “truly private” </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>What is the legal rationale? Why? </li></ul></ul></ul>
  6. 6. <ul><li>SPORT CLUBS: TITLE II CLAIM </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Truly private” Test (Lansdowne Swim Club) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Genuine selectiveness in granting membership </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Members’ control over operation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>History of organization (public < private) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Nonmember use of the facility </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Purpose of the club’s existence (public < private) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ads for membership (wide < niche) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>$$$ or non-$$$ org. ($$$ < non-$$$) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Formalities (by-laws, meetings, etc.) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  7. 7. <ul><li>SPORT CLUBS: “TRULY PRIVATE” TEST </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Lansdowne Swim Club </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Fact: Black family rejected several times; only one non-White member in entire history </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Rule: 8-factor test is broadly construed (court referred only three factors and found discrimination) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Rationale & policy: Title II is a remedial statute </li></ul></ul></ul>
  8. 8. <ul><li>SPORT CLUBS: § 1981 of the Civil Rights Act </li></ul><ul><ul><li>No intentional discrimination based upon “race” in making or enforcing contracts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Specifically prohibits “racial discrimination” </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>No exemption for private clubs </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Usually resorted in membership termination or suspension case </li></ul></ul></ul>
  9. 9. <ul><li>SPORT CLUBS: § 1983 of the Civil Rights Act </li></ul><ul><ul><li>When rights under US Constitution or federal law are compromised </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Defendant must be a “state actor” (nexus test) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Different cause of action from § 1981 claim possible </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Example: BGSU golf club </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Discrimination based on race in contract ( § 1981 ) </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1 st AM right to association was compromised ( § 1983) </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  10. 10. <ul><li>SPORT CLUBS: ADA CLAIM </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Three-part test for P (prima facie) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Does Plaintiff have a “covered disability”? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Does the impairment substantially limit a “major life activity (e.g., sport activity)?” </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Discriminated on the basis of that disability? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Kuketz v. Petronelli </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Fact: Wheelchair racket ball player versus tournament </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Rule: If fundamental alteration is necessary for accommodation, no need to do it </li></ul></ul></ul>
  11. 11. <ul><li>SCHOOLS: TITLE IX </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Remarkable progression in gender equity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Female HS athletes: 294,000 (1971)  3M (2005) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Female collegiate athletes: 15% (1971)  43% (2004) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No gender discrimination in EDU. (if $$$ from Gov) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>USSC: If program receives $$$  only program is subject to Title IX (not whole school) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Congress: School as a whole must comply, even if one individual program receives federal funds </li></ul></ul></ul>
  12. 12. <ul><li>SCHOOLS: TITLE IX </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Enforcement process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Individual or groups may petition U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights (“OCR”) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>OCR itself may begin investigation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Injunction & $$$ damage possible (e.g., Pepperdine University) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  13. 13. <ul><li>SCHOOLS: TITLE IX (COMPLIANCE); 3 WAYS </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Prong #1: “We are done!” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Opportunity in athletic program is substantially proportionate to gender distribution </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Prong #2: “We are moving on” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>If one gender is under-represented in athletics, history & continuing efforts responsive to that gender group </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Prong #3: “It’s still OK… Look!” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>If one gender is under-represented in athletics & no history or continuing effort, whether interests of the gender group is accommodated by present system </li></ul></ul></ul>
  14. 14. <ul><li>SCHOOLS: TITLE IX </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cohen v. Brown Univ. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Fact: School demoted men & women’s programs </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Rule: Gender difference in levels of interest in sport cannot satisfy the 3 rd prong compliance </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Rationale </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Male (80%) > female (40%)  rejected by court </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Title IX supports a preferential treatment of the under-represented gender </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Closing men’s program for Title IX is not a reverse discrimination </li></ul></ul>
  15. 15. <ul><li>DRUG TESTING </li></ul><ul><ul><li>4 th AM: No unreasonable search & seizure by state </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Balancing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Conspicuous status of athlete & repercussions </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Athlete’s 4 th AM right </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>4 th AM test </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Whether it was state action (NCAA is not!) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Was it search & seizure? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Was it reasonable? (probable cause & scope) </li></ul></ul></ul>
  16. 16. <ul><li>DRUG TESTING </li></ul><ul><ul><li>U. of Colorado v. Derdeyn </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Fact: Random urine test for collegiate athletes </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Rule: No unreasonable search for collegiate student athletes at state universities </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Vernonia School District v. Acton </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Fact: Minor football players (≠ Dedeyn case above) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Rule: Random urine test is acceptable for high school athletes </li></ul></ul></ul>
  17. 17. <ul><li>REGULATING PARTICIPATION </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Private clubs: “Truly private” test </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Schools: Must comply Title IX </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Drug testing: 4 th AM search & seizure </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Only state actors are subject to 4 th Amendment </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>NCAA may be conduct drug testing without considering 4 th AM challenge </li></ul></ul></ul>

×