SPT 610 8-1 Discussion: NCAA v. Tarkanian
The court in the NCAA v. Tarkanian case decided that the NCAA was not a state actor because it
found that the organization did not have sufficient connections with the government to be
considered a state actor. The court's decision was based on the fact that the NCAA was a private,
non-profit organization that was not created by the government and did not receive any
significant government funding.
Whether this should be the precedent is a matter of debate. On one hand, the decision allows the
NCAA to operate as a private organization without being subject to constitutional constraints,
which allows for a degree of flexibility in how it governs college sports. On the other hand, some
argue that the NCAA's significant influence over college sports and the fact that it affects the
lives of thousands of student athletes make it deserving of greater scrutiny and accountability.
Ultimately, the question of whether the NCAA should be considered a state actor will likely
continue to be the subject of debate and legal challenges.
The NCAA v. Tarkanian case was a landmark legal case involving the National Collegiate
Athletic Association (NCAA) and former basketball coach Jerry Tarkanian. The case was heard
by the Supreme Court of the United States and concerned the authority of the NCAA to enforce
its rules and regulations against its member institutions and individuals.
In the case, Coach Tarkanian challenged the NCAA's authority to investigate and punish him for
alleged rule violations. He argued that the NCAA was a state actor and therefore subject to
constitutional constraints, including due process requirements. The NCAA argued that it was a
private organization and not subject to constitutional constraints.
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA was not a state actor and therefore not
subject to constitutional constraints. The court held that the NCAA was a private organization
that was not created by the government and did not receive significant government funding. The
Court also found that the NCAA did not have sufficient connections with the government to be
considered a state actor.
The NCAA v. Tarkanian case has been widely discussed and analyzed, and it remains a
significant decision in the area of sports law. The case has implications for the authority of the
NCAA and other sports organizations to enforce their rules and regulations, and it continues to
be cited in legal cases and discussions of sports governance.
Reference
National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Tarkanian (1988). (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.lexisnexis.com/community/casebrief/p/casebrief-nat-l-collegiate-ath-ass-n-v-
tarkanian
Tarkanian, J. v. National Collegiate Athletic Association (1988). 488 U.S. 179. Retrieved from
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/488/179.html
Kerwin, K. (2004). The state action doctrine and the NCAA. Pepperdine Law Review, 17(1),
1-26. https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr/vol17/iss1/10/
