This will knock your socks off!

[just1np]

BAs arguement was that their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights had been abused. I'm still not clear what their specific arguement was as it pertains to the 14th, but I think it was in relation to an "actor" of the government impeading their right of free speech, particularly in their 'right' to communicate with students not yet enrolled in their school. Or in our terms, their right to recruit.

The disability thing is an aspect that COULD arise based on the precedent of this ruling. I just stumbled onto that particular web page and thought it was interesting and worth sharing with you guys for discussion sake

[just1np]

Here is a sample of the link I gave. I have a feeling some of you didn't read it.

So make sure if your child is denied some activity in your public school, that you get the school to

put in writing exactly what the policy is. If it involves some other entity making or influencing the

decision, that claims that they are beyond the law because they are private, challenge that in

writing. Your school district can no longer hide behind the argument that the other agency "made

me do it."

-Reed Martin, West Viginia Attorne

[ELA]

I see their point. The local school board can't discriminate because they claim they were forced to based on a third party regulation because Federal Law supercedes all state laws, county regulations, and contracts or agreements with interested third parties. I will say this, most school boards have some of the best lawyers money can buy!

[just1np]

I'd like to throw out some thoughts(some mine, some others) about the Court's ruling that the TSSAA is an "arm" or "actor" of the government.

Here is a statement made concerning the Court's decision-

The Supreme Court stated that there is not a simple line between state government and "people

operating outside formally governmental organizations." If there is "a close nexus between the

State and the challenged action, that seemingly private behavior may be fairly treated as that of

the State itself."

 

The Supreme Court further found that the activity of the "association"(TSSAA) provided "an integral

element of secondary public schooling" and was therefore carrying out a governmental function.-www.reedmartin.com

 

So, in other words, the TSSAA, which composed of 84% public schools(government funded and operated) DOES INDEED act as a "state actor".

That is where the 1st and 14th Amendments come in and disrupt TSSAA's traditional way of conducting business.

This is where I begin to believe that a split is inevitible.

I don't want to see that happen, but I'm not sure TSSAA can deal with private schools. I'm not sure what options are out there, but they are likely to be drastic.

To me the public-private arguement is over. It won't be up to you and me and the coaches and school boards. It can't, because they are state actors and make up the majority of the TSSAA.

In my eyes this boils down to one thing: Someone was caught cheating and didn't want to pay the price. They sued, won, and now the governing body of high school athletics has its hands tied behind its back

[TheEgoHasLanded]

Split them up, but remember...there would be no argument of publics were winning...publics aren't winning and therefore there is a problem.

[just1np]

For some people that is the case, yes.

Some of us just want to see good football.

Unfortunate as it is, the resentment will always remain. That doesn't make it right, but it is the reality.