Legal Protection of Sports Participation Opportunities in the United States of America
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article describes and compares the existing legal frameworks governing athletic eligibility rules and dispute resolution processes for Olympic, professional, college, and high school sports in the United States from both private law and public law perspectives. United States law does not recognize any constitutionally protected or fundamental right to participate in sports. Nevertheless, Olympic and professional athletes are provided a means to seek independent de novo review of eligibility decisions, usually through a system of private arbitration. In contrast, despite the significant benefits of participation in intercollegiate or interscholastic competition, U.S. courts almost uniformly refuse to recognize a legally protected interest in interscholastic or intercollegiate athletic participation absent a valid contractual right to play a sport and refuse to apply de novo review or more than very limited rational basis scrutiny of student athlete eligibility determinations.
Abstract
This article describes and compares the existing legal frameworks governing athletic eligibility rules and dispute resolution processes for Olympic, professional, college, and high school sports in the United States from both private law and public law perspectives. United States law does not recognize any constitutionally protected or fundamental right to participate in sports. Nevertheless, Olympic and professional athletes are provided a means to seek independent de novo review of eligibility decisions, usually through a system of private arbitration. In contrast, despite the significant benefits of participation in intercollegiate or interscholastic competition, U.S. courts almost uniformly refuse to recognize a legally protected interest in interscholastic or intercollegiate athletic participation absent a valid contractual right to play a sport and refuse to apply de novo review or more than very limited rational basis scrutiny of student athlete eligibility determinations.
참고문헌 (9)
- Travis T. Tygart, "Winners Never Dope and Finally, Dopers Never Win: USADA Takes Over Drug Testing of United States Olympic Athletes, 1 DePaul J. Sports L. & Contemp. Probs. 124", ~ (2003)
- Anne Benedetti, "There’s a New Sheriff in Town: A Review of the United States Anti?doping Agency, I.S.L.R. 19", ~ (2003)
- "NFL Salary Cap to Keep Going Through the Roof, USA Today, Jul. 7, 2006, available at"[URL]
- John E. Nowak, "Principles of Constitutional Law sec. 8.1", ~ (2005)
- Erwin Chemerinsky, "Constitutional Law Principles and Policies sec. 5.3", ~ (2002)
- Robert A. McCormick, "The Myth of the Student?Athlete: The College Athlete as Employee, 81 Wash. L. Rev. 71", ~ (2006)
- Scott C. Idleman, "Religious Freedom and the Interscholastic Athlete, 12 Marq. Sports L. Rev. 295", ~ (2001)
- John P. Sahl, "College Athletes and Due Process Protection: What’s Left After National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Tarkanian?, 21 Ariz. St. L. J. 621, 657", ~ (1989)
- Brian L. Porto, "Note, Balancing Due Process and Academic Integrity in Intercollegiate Athletics: The Scholarship Athletes’ Limited Property Interest Ineligibility, 62 Ind. L.J. 1151", ~ (1987)