October Term 2000 · Docket 00-24
Does the ADA require golf tours to allow caddies for disabled players?
The PGA Tour argues caddies are essential to the game. Casey Martin argues the ADA mandates this accommodation.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
H. Bartow Farr argued the Ninth Circuit erred. He claimed the court misapplied the ADA to professional athletes.
Ms. Underwood argued the case tests ADA coverage. She emphasized the importance of applying the law to sports.
Mr. Reardon discussed the PGA's Q School history. He highlighted the league's long-standing qualification process.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 3-31 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 3-31
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of the Americans with Disabilities Act. It asks if professional sports leagues must modify rules for disabled athletes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 3-31 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 3-31
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 17, 2001.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-11
What each side wants
The PGA Tour wants to keep its no-caddie rule. It argues this rule defines the sport.
Casey Martin wants to use a caddie. He argues the ADA requires this accommodation.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 3-31 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 3-31
What each side says
The PGA Tour argues caddies are part of the game. It claims the ADA does not force rule changes.
Casey Martin argues the ADA covers professional athletes. He claims the caddie rule excludes him.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 3-31 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 3-31
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked about the PGA's Q School history. He sought clarification on the league's structure.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-11
Why it matters
This case defines the ADA's reach in professional sports. It determines if leagues must alter core rules for disabled players. The outcome shapes accessibility standards for all competitive athletics.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 3-31 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 3-31
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-11
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 3-31 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 3-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 41, lines 3-31 — Transcript, file page 41, lines 3-31
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.