National Collegiate Athletic Assn. v. Tarkanian
488 U.S. 179, 1988 U.S. LEXIS 5613, 102 L. Ed. 2d 469 (1988)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A private entity's conduct does not constitute state action, and thus is not subject to the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause, even when a public institution adopts the private entity's rules and recommendations, if the public institution makes the final decision and the private entity has no direct authority to discipline the public institution's employees.
Facts:
- Jerry Tarkanian was the head basketball coach at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), a state-funded public university.
- UNLV is a member of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), a private, unincorporated association that establishes rules for intercollegiate athletics for its member institutions.
- As a condition of its membership, UNLV agreed to abide by and enforce the NCAA's rules and regulations.
- Following an investigation into UNLV's basketball program, the NCAA's Committee on Infractions found 38 rule violations, including 10 involving Tarkanian.
- The NCAA placed UNLV on probation and issued a 'show-cause' order, requiring UNLV to sever all ties with Tarkanian during the probation period or face additional penalties.
- The NCAA did not have the authority to directly discipline Tarkanian; its enforcement power was limited to imposing sanctions on its member institution, UNLV.
- To avoid the threat of more severe sanctions from the NCAA, UNLV's president notified Tarkanian that he was being suspended from the university's intercollegiate athletic program.
Procedural Posture:
- Jerry Tarkanian sued UNLV in Nevada state court, seeking an injunction to prevent his suspension and alleging a deprivation of due process rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
- The state trial court granted the injunction against UNLV.
- On appeal by UNLV, the Nevada Supreme Court reversed and remanded, ruling that the NCAA was a necessary party that must be joined to the lawsuit.
- Tarkanian filed an amended complaint adding the NCAA as a defendant.
- Following a bench trial, the state court found that the NCAA's conduct constituted state action and that Tarkanian's due process rights were violated. It enjoined both UNLV and the NCAA.
- The NCAA appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court.
- The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's holding that the NCAA was a state actor and upheld the injunction preventing Tarkanian's suspension.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Nevada Supreme Court's holding on the state action issue.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), a private voluntary association, engage in state action under the Fourteenth Amendment when it investigates a public university's athletic program and recommends that the university discipline one of its employees?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Stevens
No, the NCAA does not engage in state action when it recommends sanctions against a public university's employee. The NCAA's conduct is not 'fairly attributable' to the state because it is a private actor that was in an adversarial position with the state university, and the final disciplinary action was taken by the university itself, which retained the power to accept or reject the NCAA's recommendations. The Court reasoned that this case is a 'mirror image' of a typical state action case; the harm-causing decision was made by the state actor (UNLV), not the private party (NCAA). UNLV did not delegate its authority to discipline Tarkanian to the NCAA; it merely chose to comply with the NCAA's recommendation to avoid further sanctions. UNLV and the NCAA were adversaries, not partners, throughout the investigation. The NCAA's promulgation of rules that UNLV chose to adopt does not make the NCAA a state actor, just as the American Bar Association is not a state actor when a state adopts its model rules. Ultimately, UNLV retained the power to withdraw from the NCAA or accept heavier sanctions, meaning it made the final choice.
Dissenting - Justice White
Yes, the NCAA did engage in state action because it was a 'willful participant in joint action' with UNLV. Citing precedents like Dennis v. Sparks, the dissent argued that a private party becomes a state actor when it conspires or acts jointly with a state official to deprive a person of their constitutional rights. Here, UNLV and the NCAA acted jointly because: 1) UNLV contractually agreed to administer its athletic program according to NCAA rules; 2) UNLV delegated the fact-finding process for rules violations to the NCAA; and 3) UNLV agreed to be bound by the NCAA's findings. UNLV suspended Tarkanian specifically because of the NCAA's findings from the NCAA-run hearing, making the two entities joint participants in the suspension. The fact that UNLV and the NCAA were 'adversaries' during the investigation does not negate their underlying agreement to have the NCAA's process and findings dictate the outcome.
Analysis:
This decision significantly narrowed the scope of the state action doctrine, particularly as it applies to powerful private regulatory associations. It established that a state entity's decision to comply with a private organization's rules and recommendations, even under significant pressure, does not transform the private organization into a state actor. This makes it far more difficult to hold private entities like the NCAA directly liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for due process violations. The ruling shifts the legal focus to the state institutions (e.g., public universities) that make the final decision to impose sanctions, as they remain the state actors responsible for providing due process.
