Hill (plaintiff) and other student athletes at Stanford University objected to the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) (defendant) drug testing program and brought suit in state court alleging violations of their right to privacy. The trial court found for Hill, holding that the drug testing program violates the students’ privacy interests by requiring them to (1) disclose medications they were using and other information related to medical conditions; (2) urinate in the presence of a monitor; and (3) provide a urine sample that revealed the chemical and other substances in their bodies. The trial court additionally held that student athletes do not use drugs more frequently than regular college students and thus, there was no “compelling need” for drug testing. The court noted that the program was “overbroad” because it banned “useful” over-the-counter medications and prescription drugs “designed to improve the health of the athlete” and that the NCAA failed to show that certain drugs such as amphetamines, diuretics, marijuana, and heroin, actually enhanced athletic performance. The NCAA appealed.