National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Robert F. Miller,
Governor, State of Nevada case brief summary
10 F.3d 633 (1993)
CASE FACTS
The Nevada legislature enacted Nev. Rev. Stat. § 398.155-398.255, which required any national collegiate athletic association to provide a Nevada institution, employee, student-athlete, or booster who is accused of a rules infraction with certain procedural due process protections during an enforcement proceeding in which sanctions may be imposed. Appellee athletic association brought action for declaratory judgment, claiming the statute was unconstitutional. The lower court found that the statute violated both the Commerce Clause and the Contracts Clause.
DISCUSSION
On appeal, the court affirmed the decision of the lower court. The court found that the statute in question violated the Commerce Clause per se as it directly controlled commerce occurring outside the boundaries of the state.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the lower court's decision in favor of appellee athletic association because the court found that the statute in question directly controlled commerce occurring wholly outside the state's boundaries and violated the Commerce Clause per se.
Suggested Study Aid For Sports Law
10 F.3d 633 (1993)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Appellant college officials sought
review of a judgment from the United States District Court for the
District of Nevada, which was in favor of appellee athletic
association. The judgment found that Nev. Rev. Stat. §
398.155-398.255 violated U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl.3 and U.S. Const. art. I, § 10.CASE FACTS
The Nevada legislature enacted Nev. Rev. Stat. § 398.155-398.255, which required any national collegiate athletic association to provide a Nevada institution, employee, student-athlete, or booster who is accused of a rules infraction with certain procedural due process protections during an enforcement proceeding in which sanctions may be imposed. Appellee athletic association brought action for declaratory judgment, claiming the statute was unconstitutional. The lower court found that the statute violated both the Commerce Clause and the Contracts Clause.
DISCUSSION
On appeal, the court affirmed the decision of the lower court. The court found that the statute in question violated the Commerce Clause per se as it directly controlled commerce occurring outside the boundaries of the state.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the lower court's decision in favor of appellee athletic association because the court found that the statute in question directly controlled commerce occurring wholly outside the state's boundaries and violated the Commerce Clause per se.
Suggested Study Aid For Sports Law
No comments:
Post a Comment