National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Smith, 525 U.S. 459 (1999), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the NCAA's receipt of dues payments from colleges and universities which received federal funds, was not sufficient to subject the NCAA to a lawsuit under Title IX.[1]
119 S. Ct. 924; 142 L. Ed. 2d 929; 1999 U.S. LEXIS 1511; 67 U.S.L.W. 4130; 99 Cal. Daily Op. Service 1345; 99 Daily Journal DAR 1669; 1999 Colo. J. C.A.R. 878; 12 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 110
Renee M. Smith, an intercollegiate volleyball player, had played volleyball for two seasons from the fall of 1991 to 1993 at St. Bonaventure University. Smith graduated from St. Bonaventure University during the 1994 - 1995 athletic year and later enrolled in a postgraduate program at the University of Pittsburgh for the 1995 - 1996 athletic year. Smith had hoped to play volleyball for the University of Pittsburgh but was denied athletic eligibility by the NCAA on the basis of its Post Baccalaureate restrictions. Smith and The University of Pittsburgh applied for a waiver from the National Collegiate Athletic Association, to lift the restrictions on the athletic eligibility of graduate students. However the waiver was denied by the NCAA.[1]
Procedural historyedit
In August 1996, Smith filed a lawsuit pro se against the NCAA, alleging that the NCAA’s decision to not allow her to play intercollegiate volleyball at the University of Pittsburgh and Hofstra University on the basis of her sex, in that the NCAA grants more waivers for athletic eligibility restrictions to male than female post graduate student athletes. The NCAA attempted to have the case dismissed on the grounds that it did not receive federal assistance. This would exempt the NCAA from compliance with Title IX which states that "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance..." The district court dismissed the case, claiming that Smith could not claim that Title IX was applicable.[2] Smith then amended her claim.
The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit later reversed the district court's decision.[3] The NCAA then petitioned for Supreme Court review. They claimed that the court decision did not agree with the previous court case Department of Transportation v. Paralyzed Veterans of America,[4] which prohibits discrimination against any handicapped person in “any program or activity receiving any federal financial assistance.” The Supreme Court granted certiorari, in order to find out if a private organization such as the NCAA, that does not receive federal financial assistance, can be subject to Title IX simply because it receives funds from organizations that do receive federal financial assistance, making the NCAA indirectly federally funded.
Opinion of the Courtedit
The Supreme Court came to a unanimous decision ruling that the NCAA cannot be sued under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and remanded the case for further proceedings complying with this decision. The Supreme Court held that allegations did not exist that state that the NCAA uses the funds from its institutions that are federally funded, to provide any students with any form of financial aid. They stressed that only institutions that are federally funded directly can be subject to coverage by Title IX.[1]
^Dep't of Transp. v. Paralyzed Veterans of America, 477U.S. 597 (1986).
^"Chief Justice John G. Roberts Cases before the Supreme Court". Washington University Law. Washington University School of Law. Retrieved May 4, 2018.
External linksedit
Text of NCAA v. Smith, 525U.S. 459 (1999) is available from:CornellCourtListenerFindlawGoogle ScholarJustiaLibrary of CongressOyez (oral argument audio)
December 02, 2023
ncaa, smith, national, collegiate, athletic, association, smith, 1999, case, which, supreme, court, united, states, ruled, that, ncaa, receipt, dues, payments, from, colleges, universities, which, received, federal, funds, sufficient, subject, ncaa, lawsuit, u. National Collegiate Athletic Association v Smith 525 U S 459 1999 was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the NCAA s receipt of dues payments from colleges and universities which received federal funds was not sufficient to subject the NCAA to a lawsuit under Title IX 1 National Collegiate Athletic Association v SmithSupreme Court of the United StatesArgued January 20 1999Decided February 23 1999Full case nameNational Collegiate Athletic Association Petitioner v R M SmithCitations525 U S 459 more 119 S Ct 924 142 L Ed 2d 929 1999 U S LEXIS 1511 67 U S L W 4130 99 Cal Daily Op Service 1345 99 Daily Journal DAR 1669 1999 Colo J C A R 878 12 Fla L Weekly Fed S 110Case historyPriorSmith v NCAA 978 F Supp 213 W D Pa 1997 affirmed in part reversed in part 139 F 3d 180 3d Cir 1998 cert granted 524 U S 982 1998 SubsequentSmith v NCAA 266 F 3d 152 3d Cir 2001 Court membershipChief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices John P Stevens Sandra Day O ConnorAntonin Scalia Anthony KennedyDavid Souter Clarence ThomasRuth Bader Ginsburg Stephen BreyerCase opinionMajorityGinsburg joined by unanimousLaws appliedTitle IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 20 U S C 1681 et seq Contents 1 Background 1 1 Procedural history 2 Opinion of the Court 3 See also 4 References 5 External linksBackground editRenee M Smith an intercollegiate volleyball player had played volleyball for two seasons from the fall of 1991 to 1993 at St Bonaventure University Smith graduated from St Bonaventure University during the 1994 1995 athletic year and later enrolled in a postgraduate program at the University of Pittsburgh for the 1995 1996 athletic year Smith had hoped to play volleyball for the University of Pittsburgh but was denied athletic eligibility by the NCAA on the basis of its Post Baccalaureate restrictions Smith and The University of Pittsburgh applied for a waiver from the National Collegiate Athletic Association to lift the restrictions on the athletic eligibility of graduate students However the waiver was denied by the NCAA 1 Procedural history edit In August 1996 Smith filed a lawsuit pro se against the NCAA alleging that the NCAA s decision to not allow her to play intercollegiate volleyball at the University of Pittsburgh and Hofstra University on the basis of her sex in that the NCAA grants more waivers for athletic eligibility restrictions to male than female post graduate student athletes The NCAA attempted to have the case dismissed on the grounds that it did not receive federal assistance This would exempt the NCAA from compliance with Title IX which states that No person in the United States shall on the basis of sex be excluded from participation in be denied the benefits of or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance The district court dismissed the case claiming that Smith could not claim that Title IX was applicable 2 Smith then amended her claim The Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit later reversed the district court s decision 3 The NCAA then petitioned for Supreme Court review They claimed that the court decision did not agree with the previous court case Department of Transportation v Paralyzed Veterans of America 4 which prohibits discrimination against any handicapped person in any program or activity receiving any federal financial assistance The Supreme Court granted certiorari in order to find out if a private organization such as the NCAA that does not receive federal financial assistance can be subject to Title IX simply because it receives funds from organizations that do receive federal financial assistance making the NCAA indirectly federally funded Opinion of the Court editThe Supreme Court came to a unanimous decision ruling that the NCAA cannot be sued under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and remanded the case for further proceedings complying with this decision The Supreme Court held that allegations did not exist that state that the NCAA uses the funds from its institutions that are federally funded to provide any students with any form of financial aid They stressed that only institutions that are federally funded directly can be subject to coverage by Title IX 1 The NCAA was represented on its appeal to the Supreme Court by John Roberts who would later become Chief Justice of the United States in 2005 5 See also editNCAA v Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma List of United States Supreme Court cases volume 525References edit a b c NCAA v Smith 525 U S 459 1999 Smith v NCAA 978 F Supp 213 W D Pa 1997 Smith v NCAA 139 F 3d 180 3d Cir 1998 Dep t of Transp v Paralyzed Veterans of America 477 U S 597 1986 Chief Justice John G Roberts Cases before the Supreme Court Washington University Law Washington University School of Law Retrieved May 4 2018 External links editText of NCAA v Smith 525 U S 459 1999 is available from Cornell CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress Oyez oral argument audio Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title NCAA v Smith amp oldid 1181106084, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
