National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Smith
United States Supreme Court
525 U.S. 459 (1999)
- Written by Brianna Pine, JD
Facts
Renee Smith (plaintiff) completed her undergraduate degree in two and a half years and then enrolled in graduate school at a different institution, where she sought to continue playing intercollegiate volleyball. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) (defendant) denied Smith’s eligibility under its rule allowing graduate students to play only at the institution where they earned their undergraduate degree. Smith requested a waiver, which the NCAA denied. Smith sued the NCAA under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits sex discrimination in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance, arguing that the NCAA granted more waivers to male than female athletes. The NCAA moved to dismiss, arguing that it was not subject to Title IX because it was not a recipient of federal financial assistance. Smith countered that the NCAA governed federally funded programs and benefited economically from member institutions’ receipt of federal funds. The district court dismissed the complaint, finding the NCAA’s ties to federal funding too attenuated. It also denied Smith’s motion to amend her complaint. The Third Circuit reversed that denial, holding that the NCAA’s receipt of dues from federally funded member institutions could bring it within the scope of Title IX. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ginsberg, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

