Racial discrimination takes many forms, especially in sports. Starting with the less-than-subtle discrimination of all minorities from major league teams and extending today to the subtle discrimination in private clubs, discrimination is rampant. Within private clubs, discrimination is technically legal. It is a constitutional right protected by the First Amendment. By definition, a private sports club is discriminate. It can be selective about who is allowed in as a member and who is not. There are many private clubs which only allow members who meet income criteria, while others only allow members based on pedigree. Still, others only admit members based on geographic area, and some will outwardly discriminate based on race.
In 1990, racial discrimination at the Shoal Creek Country Club, then scheduled to host the PGA tournament brought to media attention when the president and founder of the club responded that allowing an African American into the club was unheard of and was something not done in Birmingham, where the club was located. The public began to boycott the club, leading it to accept its first African American member (Herity, 24). Soon after, the PGA and LPGA instigated non-discrimination standards. But groups such as the Augusta National are not required to meet such standards and fight compliance based on the idea that the term “discrimination” could bring with it a multitude of meanings and is therefore open to interpretation (Martin).
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Racial Discrimination in Private Clubs".
Private clubs are exempt from protections that Congress might provide to other protected classes, however. Private clubs are exempt from civil rights laws, and they are typically subsidized through government approved tax exemptions. Many private sports clubs are non-profit clubs which means they do not pay federal income taxes. They are also, in many cases, exempt from paying state franchise taxes for any of their income. Private clubs can also receive exemptions from property taxes including real estate holdings (Jolly-Ryan, 236).
It is these exemptions bring with them the freedom to enforcing “non-discrimination” requirements and regulations on a club-by-club basis (Frank, 189). Things may have come a long way since the public outcry in 1990, but they still have quite a ways to go.
- Frank, Sally “The Key to Unlocking the Clubhouse Door: The Application of Antidiscrimination Laws to Quasi-Private Clubs.” 2 MICH. J. GENDER & L. 27.81 (1994): 189.
- Herity, Marcia ChambersJim. “From The Archives: Marcia Chambers – The Changing Face Of Private Clubs.” Golf Digest. N.p., Aug. 2000. Web. 24 Feb. 2015.
- Jolly-Ryan, Jennifer. “Teed Off about Private Club Discrimination on the Taxpayer’s Dime: Tax Exemptions and Other Government Privileges to Discriminatory Private Clubs.” Wm. & Mary J. Women & L 13.1 (2006): 235-72. Web.
- Martin, Dave. “USATODAY.com – Golf’s Host Clubs Have Open-and-shut Policies on Discrimination.” USATODAY.com – Golf’s Host Clubs Have Open-and-shut Policies on Discrimination. Associated Press, 10 Apr. 2003. Web. 24 Feb. 2015.
