Exam 3 Sport Legal

Front 1

State Action protected

Back 1

- The constitution protects citizens from unreasonable interference from the government.

1. What is the government?

2. Can some private conduct be considered "state action"?

Front 2

What are the 2 State Action Tests?

Back 2

1. Public Function Theory

2. Nexus/Entanglement Theory

Front 3

Public Function Theory

Back 3

A court can find state action in the activities of a private party if that party undertakes functions or assumes powers that the government ordinarily performs or exercises.

Front 4

Public Function Theory:
Private activities will only constitute state action if?

Back 4

1. The activities involve a function that traditionally has been performed only by government.

2. The private entity's assumption of the function substantially replaced the government's traditional performance of the function.

Front 5

Nexus/Entanglement Theory

Back 5

Examines whether the state's involvement or entanglement with a private actors conduct is sufficient to transform the private conduct into state action, and thus subject to constitutional review.

Front 6

Are Interscholastic Associations state Actors?

Back 6

Interscholastic Associations generally are considered state actors. (Rationale; membership is generally public schools funded through tax payer dollars.)

Front 7

Are National Collegiate Organizations State Actors?

Back 7

National Collegiate organizations generally are not considered state actors. (Rationale; Intercollegiate athletics was not a function traditionally reserved to the state.)

Front 8

What is Due Process?

Back 8

An expected course of legal proceedings which have been established in our system of jurisprudence for the protection and enforcement of private rights.

- Due process guarantees the process not the outcome.

- Admission of guilt negates the need for due process.

Front 9

Due Process Analysis?

Back 9

-The starting point is state action.
1. Is their state action?

- What right has been deprived?
2. Life, Liberty or property interests?

- How was their due process right violated?
-Substantive Due Process
-Procedural Due Process

Front 10

Substantive Due Process

Back 10

- A rule or regulation must be fair and reasonable in application as well as content.

- Protects against arbitrary (random) and capricious (impulsive/changeable) actions.

Front 11

What 2 Questions are asked in Substantive Due Process?

Back 11

1. Does the rule or regulation have a proper purpose?

2. Does the rule or regulation clearly relate to the accomplishment of that purpose?

Front 12

Procedural Due Process

Back 12

Examines the decision - making process that is followed in determining whether a rule or regulation has been violated and what sanction should be imposed.

- Fair treatment is the goal of procedural due process.

Front 13

Procedural Due Process Assesses Enforcement?

Back 13

- Severity of the violation

- Severity of the punishment

- Procedures used

Front 14

Balancing Test

Back 14

Private Interest; That will be affected by the offical action.
vs.
Risk of erroneous deprivation; of such interest through the procedures used.

Front 15

Significance of Goss v. Lopez (1975)

Back 15

Due Process owed to Students:

1. Statement of specific violations (oral and written notice)

2. Notice of Punishment

3. Opportunity to respond (hearing).

Front 16

Search and Seizure

Back 16

The starting point is state action.
- Is their state action?

- Is the conduct a search?

- Is search Reasonable?
Probable cause v. Reasonable suspicion.

- Involves the 4th amendment.

Front 17

4th Amendment?

Back 17

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon PROBABLE CAUSE, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Front 18

New Jersey v. T. L. O. (1985)

Back 18

Principal searched purse of a HS student b/c she was suspected of smoking in restroom.
- Found Cigarettes and rolling papers.
-Upon finding rolling papers, he continued search and found drugs.

Front 19

What is the 2 - fold test for reasonableness of a search?

Back 19

1. Was the search justified at its inception? (was there reasonable suspicion)

2. Was the search reasonable in its scope? (Degree of intrusion on an individuals privacy against governments interest in testing)

Front 20

Significance of New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)

Back 20

1. The princlipal was acting in loco parentis.

2. The court adopted a lower standard - "Reasonable suspicion"

Front 21

Reasonable Suspicion

Back 21

The existence of reasonable circumstances, reports, information, or reasonable direct observation.

Front 22

Balancing Test for T.L.O.
3 Factors?

Back 22

1. A legitimate privacy expectation.

2. The charater of the intrusion

3. The nature and immediacy of the governmental concern.

Front 23

1. Legitimate Privacy Expectation

Back 23

Does the individual have a legitimate privacy expectation upon which the search intrudes?

Privacy Expectations; are different depending upon environment.(home,school, car, ect.)

Front 24

2. Character of the Intrusion

Back 24

In determining the character of the intrusion, the court examines:

1. How the drug test collects samples.

2. The type of information being collected.

Front 25

3. Nature and Immediacy of the Governmental concern

Back 25

In other words, is the state's interest in conducting the drug test important enough to justify intruding upon an individuals expectation of privacy?

Front 26

Vernonia v. Acton (1995)
Significance

Back 26

- Testing based on suspicion of drug use would not be better, but worse.

- Random suspiciousless drug testing is constitutional for student - athletes.

Front 27

Vernonia v. Acton (1995)
Issue 1

Back 27

Nature of privacy interest

Decision: Students have a lesser expectation of privacy.

- There is an element of "communal undress" inherent in athletic participation.

Front 28

Vernonia v. Acton (1995)
Issue 2

Back 28

Character of the intrusion

Decision: Conditions of test collection are nearly identical to these typically encountered in public restrooms.

Front 29

Vernonia v. Acton (1995)
Issue 3

Back 29

Information the test discloses

Decision: Test only looked for drugs, and not other conditions.

- Results were disclosed only to school personnel and were not turned over to law enforcement authorities.

- Invasion of privacy was not significant.

Front 30

Vernonia v. Acton (1995)
Issue 4.

Back 30

Governmental interest

Decision: Deterring the drug use of our nation's school children "deemed a compelling governmental interest."

Front 31

What are the Three Tests used to examine religious practices under the first amendment?

Back 31

1. The Lemon Test

2. The Coercion Test

3. The Endorsement Test

Front 32

The Lemon Test

Back 32

A government practice is unconstitutional if:
- It lacks a secular purpose

- Its primary effect either afvances or inhibits religion.

- It excessively entangles government with religion.

Front 33

Secular

Back 33

Not pertaining to or connected with religion (as opposed to sacred).

- Worldly rather than spiritual.

Front 34

The Coercion Test

Back 34

Under this test, school sponsored religious activity is analyzed to determine the extent to which it has a coercive effect on students.

- Unconstitutional coercion occurs when: The government directs a formal religious exercise in such a way as to oblige the participation of objectors.

Front 35

The Endorsement Test

Back 35

The endorsement test seeks to determine if the government endorses religion by means of the challenged action?

- The government endorses religion when it conveys a message that religion is favored; preferred or promoted over other beliefs.

Front 36

1st Amendment

Back 36

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.