 |
Casey Martin was born in Eugene, Oregon, on June 2, 1972. As
a child, he developed Klippel-Trenauny-Weber Syndrome, a rare circulatory
condition for which there is no known cure.
Despite his medical condition, he developed into a star golfer, winning 17 Oregon Golf Association junior events between the ages of 10-14. He continued to excel in high school, being named first-team all-state for three years and winning the state championship as a senior. He was also valedictorian of his class. Martin went on to Stanford University, where he played No. 3 on the team that won the 1994 NCAA championship. Future PGA stars Tiger Woods and Notah Begay were on the Stanford golf team. |
Martin turned pro in 1995, joining the Nike tour. However, the disease in his right leg grew steadily worse. He could no longer walk around a golf course without experiencing great pain. Martin asked the PGA for permission to use a golf cart during competition. The PGA refused his request and Martin took golf's ruling body to court. In February 1998, a U.S. Magistrate found in Martin's favor, and that ruling was upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in March 2001. The PGA appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court.
 |
The Disease that Put Golfer Casey Martin in a Cart...Klippel-Trenaunay-Weber Syndrome . Many words have been devoted to Casey Martin, his suit brought against the PGA Tour under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the issues raised, and the reactions to Martin's use of the cart in a sport where such motorized conveyances have historically been taboo for the PGA Tour. Other golfers have not been loath to comment upon the Casey Martin matter. Those opposed to Casey's cart have included young Tiger Woods, who was Martin's roommate at Stanford, and the senior legend Arnie Palmer, who feels that, if he can still trek around 18 holes at his age, so can whippersnappers like the 25-year-old Martin. |
Little attention has been paid to the disease itself, Klippel- Trenaunay-Weber (KTW) syndrome, which is the reason why Casey Martin needs to ride in a golf cart. The press has recycled phrases such as "a congenital circulatory disorder."
KLIPPEL-TRENAUNAY SYNDROME. Moodie, D., Driscoll, D., Salvatore, D., Peripheral Vascular Disease in Children (1996). In:Young, J., Olin, J., Bartholomew, J., Peripheral Vascular Diseases, 2nd Edition, Mosby Yearbook Publishers, p541--552.
NewsMax.com Wires Thursday, Jan. 18, 2001
WASHINGTON (UPI) – In a landmark case that could affect how sports are played in the United States, the Supreme Court heard arguments Wednesday on whether the federal law banning discrimination against disabled people applies to professional golf tours.
Though the case involves PGA and pro golfer Casey Martin, an eventual decision could apply to all professional and organized amateur sports.
Martin suffers from a circulatory disorder that causes severe pain in his right leg. He won an earlier court order allowing him to use a golf cart when he plays in a PGA tournament. Like all the major tours, PGA normally requires that golfers walk the course while participating in a high-level competition.
PGA, a nonprofit association of professional golfers, sponsors three competitive tours: the PGA Tour, the Senior PGA Tour for golfers 50 and older, and the Buy.com Tour, described as "one step down" from the top-flight competitive PGA Tour.
"The tour has long maintained that, to ensure the integrity of its competitions and to maintain public confidence, all competitors must observe the substantive rules established for a particular tournament," PGA earlier told the Supreme Court in a petition.
"As a result, the golfers participating in tour events are required to compete under the same conditions," PGA said. "No competitor is given an advantage because of differences in strength or other physical characteristics."
Martin suffers from Klippel-Trenauney-Weber syndrome, a congenital vascular condition that precludes blood from properly circulating up his right leg.
Despite his condition, in 1997 he entered PGA Tour's qualifying tournament, which was used to select players for Nike Tour (now called Buy.com Tour) and PGA Tour. During the tournament's final stages, he asked permission from tour officials to use a golf cart. They refused.
Martin filed suit under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which among other things requires that a "public accommodation" take reasonable steps to serve disabled people. The ADA does not require public accommodations to "fundamentally" change their nature to provide access to the disabled. Eventually, a federal appeals court in San Francisco ruled for Martin under Title III of the ADA, saying that a waiver of the "walking rule" would not "transform" tour competitions.
PGA asked the Supreme Court last July to review the lower-court ruling, saying that although golf courses are "public accommodations" and subject to the ADA, golf tournaments held on the courses are not.
Speaking for PGA in argument Wednesday, Washington attorney H. Bartow Farr III told the justices that the appeals court made two "critical mistakes": It did not recognize that pro golfers are not members of the public seeking accommodation at a golf course but instead are like independent contractors providing entertainment to the public; and it did not recognize that allowing Martin to use a golf cart "fundamentally alters the nature of that competition."
Farr fenced repeatedly with the members of the court over his first point. Justice David Souter said PGA let all golfers compete at its lowest levels to eventually reach the major tours, even those less gifted, unlike "the football industry … they're not going to invite me to try out," the slightly built Souter said to laughter in the courtroom.
Justice John Paul Stevens, who in 1990 hit a hole in one, asked Farr when a golf course was not "a place of public accommodation" covered by the ADA.
|
Farr told Souter that everyone could try out for football at its lowest levels. He told Stevens that pro golfers "are not individuals seeking full and equal enjoyment" of a public accommodation, activity covered by Title III of the ADA. "… Golfers are part of the entertainment." Farr repeatedly argued that "substantive rules" of a sport – "rules that could affect the outcome of the tournament" – included the walking rule. |
 |
Speaking for Martin, who along with golfer and course designer Robert Trent Jones was present in the courtroom, was New York attorney Roy Reardon.
Reardon said PGA let all players use carts when conducting its qualifying school to winnow the pool of prospective players. When 168 golfers get ready to play the major tour, "none of those players need ever have walked a mile."
But baseball fan Justice Antonin Scalia interrupted. "All that proves is that you can play golf under different rules." Scalia compared the case to a pitcher in the National League, which doesn't use a designated hitter, who "gets tired" and doesn't want to bat, or a player with an "excessively long torso" who wants to shorten the strike zone. "All sports rules are silly rules," Scalia said.
Reardon insisted, however, that the walking rule was not fundamental to the way golf is played, and warned that if the Supreme Court decided against Martin, it would "basically be giving the PGA and professional sports a free pass" out from under the federal disability act.
Reardon was supported by the Clinton administration in the person of Deputy Solicitor General Barbara Underwood.
Wednesday's arguments were full of light moments. At one point, Scalia said that being ignorant of the rules of baseball would be a "much greater sin" than being ignorant of the rules of golf.
"Wait a minute," interjected Justice Sandra O'Connor, who in December shot a hole in one.
"Still in dissent," fellow golfer Stevens told her.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule before spring.
(No. 00-24, PGA Tour Inc. vs. Casey Martin)
Copyright 2001 by United Press International. All rights reserved.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that a federal anti- discrimination law requires that disabled golfer Casey Martin be allowed to ride in a cart between shots, rather than walk the course, during professional competition. By a 7-2 vote, the high court dealt a major setback to the PGA Tour, the premier U.S. professional golf tour, which argued that changing its rules for one player's physical condition would fundamentally alter the competition.
 |
Justice John Paul Stevens, an avid golfer, said
for the court majority that the law at issue, the Americans with
Disabilities Act, prohibited the PGA from denying Martin equal access to
its tours on the basis of his disability. He said allowing Martin, who
suffers from a painful circulatory disorder in his right leg that makes it
difficult for him to walk long distances, to use a golf cart, despite the
PGA's walking requirement, would not fundamentally alter the nature of the
tour. Stevens said the walking rule was neither an essential attribute of
the game itself nor an indispensable feature of tournament golf.
The U.S. Justice Department had supported Martin, saying the law applied because the PGA organizes the tournaments and invites the public. |
Martin sued the PGA Tour in 1997, saying its policy of prohibiting players from using carts during tournaments violated the disabilities law. Martin, who turns 29 on Saturday, was a college teammate of golf superstar Tiger Woods at Stanford University in the mid-1990s. Martin, not currently a regular member of the PGA Tour, plays on the Buy.Com Tour where PGA rules also apply. He may play in some regular Tour events if offered a sponsor's exemption.
The Supreme Court affirmed a federal appeals court ruling that Martin, who wears a strong support stocking to keep the swelling down in his leg, must be allowed to use a cart.
Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented. Scalia wrote that in
his view the court's opinion "exercises a benevolent compassion that the
law does not place it within our power to impose." He said the court's
judgement "distorts" the text and structure of the law and distorts
"common sense." Scalia said: "The lesson the PGA Tour and other
sports organizations should take from this case is to make sure that the same
written rules are set forth for all levels of play and never voluntarily to
grant any modifications. The second lesson is to end open tryouts. "I doubt
that, in the long run, even disabled athletes will be well served by these
incentives that the court has created," Scalia said, adding that sports
organizations like the PGA would be "second-guessed" by the courts.
By Mike Celizic, MSNBC Contributor
May 29 — The Supreme Court performed a service of compassion for Casey Martin and an awful disservice not just to golf but to all professional sports. In ruling that the PGA Tour must change one of its most fundamental rules of competition to accommodate Martin, the court has thrown itself forever into an arena in which it has no business.
The flood gates are now officially open. If the rules don’t suit you, don’t accept it, get a lawyer. This is the message the court has sent. In everyday life, it’s a good message. People with disabilities should not be discriminated against. But in professional sports, it’s simply wrong. You play by the rules or you don’t play.
That’s how it has always been. We call it a level playing field. One set of rules for everyone. No exceptions. And now it has changed because the Supreme Court has decided that it is possible to change the rules for certain individuals.
Which raises the question, How in the name of long-handled putters can nine fogies who see nothing unusual about showing up for work in floor-length gowns have a scintilla of a smidgen of a clue about what the rules of a professional sport should be? How can judges possibly presume to decide that walking the golf course is not integral to the game as played on the PGA Tour and will not give Martin an advantage over other golfers?
It is important to understand that when looking at Casey Martin. Like all of us, the court majority looked at him and his courageous efforts to play professional golf despite a circulatory disease in his legs that makes walking excruciatingly painful and was deeply moved. Like all of us, the court felt sympathy for him along with admiration. The court wanted him to succeed, as all of us do.
But rooting for Martin isn’t what this was about, not now or ever. It is about a professional sport and the rules that govern it. And the PGA Tour has a simple rule that says that its athletes must walk the golf course when playing in tournaments. The U.S.G.A., which governs the sport for all Americans, has the same rule for its premier tournaments, the U.S. Men’s and Women’s Opens.
The rule does not exist to be cruel or to discriminate. It exists because walking the course is an integral part of the game of golf. It requires a degree of fitness of the athletes, and if you don’t believe that try walking 18 hilly holes when it’s 90 degrees and the humidity is at 98 percent. Even with someone carrying your clubs, it’s hard work, and part of the test of the game is conquering fatigue through the final holes. Riding in a cart removes that essential part of the competition. By allowing Martin to ride, the court gave him an advantage over the other golfers. It’s that simple.
Okay, I know that he is starting with a huge disadvantage. But that doesn’t change anything. He is free to ride a cart anywhere he wishes, free to get a job as a club pro, free to be a teaching pro. The PGA Tour wasn’t taking away his right to earn a livelihood. It only wanted him to play by the same rules that apply to everyone.
That’s how it is in sports. You play by the rules or you don’t play. Jim Abbott was born without a right hand, but he never demanded that baseball change its rules about catching the ball because it was difficult for him. He figured out a way to pitch and catch with one hand. As a kid, he even learned how to hit. When he pitched in the Major Leagues, no one cut him a break, and he didn’t ask for one.
It makes you wonder what would have happened if Martin had played baseball. It is not unusual in rec leagues and pick-up ball games for substitute runners to run for players who have bad knees and can’t run. There’s certainly no reason — other than those pesky rules — why you couldn’t have substitute runners in the big leagues.
As far as that goes, Chuck Knoblauch lost his job as a second baseman because he contracted a mental disability which made it impossible to throw the ball to first base. In a sympathetic society, Knoblauch would be allowed to have a designated thrower stationed next to him to make those throws. After all, Knoblauch could field and hit and do everything else involved in the game. Why should he lose his job because of a disability that is no less real than Martin’s?
And shouldn’t Shaquille O’Neal be entitled to legal relief to solve his disability which prevents him from making free throws? Everyone agrees the problem is in his head, which makes it another mental illness. Why should he be punished for it?
What about someone who can’t hit a curve ball? Should he get only fast balls to make the game fair?
Don’t laugh. Some day someone will make these arguments. Our knowledge of the brain and the way it works increases by the day. It is only a matter of time before we can prove that the inability to sink a two-foot putt or a free throw and the inability to throw a ball to first base is the result of a faulty brain and not the fault of the individual. That will make it a disability. Is the court ready for that question?
And that’s why the The PGA Tour and the U.S.G.A. were so adamant. They never meant to punish Martin. They only felt that the walking rule was necessary. And they feared that if Martin were allowed to ride in a cart, the doors would be open for others with other complaints.
What about a player with asthma? Or a player who is overweight? Fat is a disability if you are naturally big or have a thyroid problem. Why should fat golfers be punished by having to walk? How about all the players with bad backs. Riding would make their jobs much easier. It might prolong their careers and would certainly increase their chances of success. Why do they have to walk when Martin can ride?
Don’t say it’s different, because it isn’t. And don’t be surprised if others demand carts and athletes in other sports demand their own special accommodations. The court has opened the doors to sue professional sports over their rules, which means that others will follow. It’s the American way.