Ludtke Verses Kuhn

Case Brief One

        Ludtke verses Kuhn was a court case in 1978 dealing with civil rights in the sporting industry. Melissa Ludtke brought the action against Bowie Kuhn, the Commissioner of Baseball, and the New York Yankees. Ludtke was a reporter for Sports Illustrated that was published by Time, Inc. She was sent to the Yankee Stadium to get the latest reports and interviews from the baseball players. Ludtke was denied access to the men’s locker room due to the fact that she was a woman. The plaintiffs of this case are Melissa Ludtke and Time, Inc. The defendants are Bowie Kuhn, Leland MacPhail (President of the American League of Professional Baseball Clubs), the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation for the City of New York, and the Director of the Economic Development Administration of The City of New York.

        The facts from the case were presented by the plaintiff and were not controversially denied by the defendants. In 1975, Kuhn wrote and sent out a letter to all major league baseball teams discussing how all the teams should remain unified and stand against women reporters entering into the clubhouses. None of the baseball players were asked at the time whether or not they cared if a woman sports reporter entered their locker room but the public relations directors were. The public relations directors of the major league teams were asked their opinions but there was not a majority rule. In 1976, the players were asked their opinions and they concluded that women could be allowed into their locker rooms if they acted professionally but opinions were overlooked. The Yankee management decided that women would not be allowed access to their clubhouse. In 1977, this policy was used against the plaintiff, Ludtke. She was denied access to the male baseball locker room after the game between the New York Yankees and the Los Angeles Dodgers. The important part of the denial of her access is that it was due to her being a female.

        Having access to the clubhouse and the locker rooms is an essential part of the reporting process. Women reporters were not given the same advantages as male reports because they were not allowed access to these facilities.  Female reporters were at a competitive disadvantage because they would not take part of the group interviews and discussions taken place inside the locker rooms. Other professional sports, like the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League, grant female reporters access to locker rooms. The female reporters who have access to locker rooms have agreed that most of their beneficial material comes from discussions in the locker rooms and that it is a very important part of their job.

        There could be alternatives to the denial of women into men’s baseball locker rooms.  The clubhouse at Yankee Stadium is broken into many compartments that consist of separate shower and toilet facilities and player cubicles. Since the clubhouse has separate areas within the locker room, women could be allowed access to the locker room without intruding the privacy of the players. For instance, curtains could be hung in order to increase privacy when necessary. Also, swinging doors could be installed so a player could stand behind the door if he wished for privacy. The players could also just wear towels when they know reporters are going to be entering in order to preserve the image of a family sport like the defendant wants to maintain.

In this case, there is no question of material fact but instead a judgment on the matter of law. The court’s purpose was whether the denial of women into the Yankee’s baseball locker room was state action that violated the Fourteenth Amendment. If so, then the court was to determine if it violated Ludtke’s equal protection under that amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment states, “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (Legal Information Institute). This is the issue at question in this case.

To determine if the Yankee Stadium should be considered for state action, the court looked at the former precedent case of Burton verses Wilmington Parking Authority. The Burton case relates to this case because both cases involve discrimination against the plaintiff on the basis of a class oriented characteristic, in the Burton case it was race and this case it is gender. Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority was a case dealing with a coffee shop and a parking garage close by. The court ruled in that case that the integration of the public parking lot with the coffee shop made it essential to carry out state action. The Burton case made it clear that private facilities that are leased from a public organization are required to abide by state action due to their relationship with the public. The court of this case looked at the Burton case and concluded that this does deal with state action with the contemplation of the Fourteenth Amendment.