Casey Martin Trial and Appeals: 1998-2001

After Martin won his suit, the PGA immediately welcomed him into the tour and he continued to use his cart while playing in various matches, including the 1998 U.S. Open. But the issues were by no means resolved and the debate continued in the media, and in May 1998, the PGA announced that it was going to appeal the decision. In May 1999, oral arguments were held before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which announced its decision on March 6, 2000, upholding the lower court's ruling. Once more, the PGA, although realizing that many people would regard it as "picking on" this disabled man, weighed the issues, then on May 31 announced it would appeal this new decision to the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, in November 1998, Martin had failed to qualify for the PGA Tour for the 1999 season—the court's decision had allowed him to ride while competing, but did not relieve him from winning the matches and/or money required to qualify. However, he did continue to play in non-PGA golf matches throughout 1999, and by October 24, 1999, he had won enough money to qualify for the 2000 season.

On September 26, 2000, the PGA passed the next hurdle when the Supreme Court announced that it would hear the case. The oral arguments were presented on January 17, 2001 (only three days after Martin signed a multimillion-dollar endorsement contract with Nike). To the court, there were only two main legal issues: Is a golf course when used for a tournament a "place of public accommodation"? Is making an exception to the walking rule the kind of accommodation required by the federal law? The lawyers inevitably argued on more emotional issues. H. Bartow Farr III, arguing on behalf of the PGA,. insisted that the previous judges had failed to recognize that all top-level professional sports, including golf, "are simply tests of excellence, of who can perform the best on a set of physical tasks. Those tasks are defined by the rules of the sport." Martin's lawyer, Roy L. Reardon, countered that "walking is not the game … The game is hitting the ball." He pointed out that Martin had earned $143,248 on the PGA Tour in 2000 while never asking, "for any modification of any rule affecting where he hit the ball, how big the hole is, or anything else." To bolster his case, Martin also filed supporting briefs from the Clinton administration and former Senator Robert Dole, himself with a hand and arm disabled in World War II.

There were several light moments during the hearing. At one point, Justice Antonin Scalia said that if some justices knew as little about baseball as they did about golf, "the former would be a much greater sin." When Justice Sandra Day O'Connor—a golfer who had shot a hole in one only the month before—objected, "Wait a minute!" Justice John Paul Stevens chimed in, "In dissent again."

On May 29, 2001, the Supreme Court ruled against the PGA in a 7-2 vote. The Court ruled that the federal anti-discrimination law required that Martin be allowed to ride in a golf cart between shots. In writing for the majority, Justice Stevens wrote that the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibited the PGA from denying Martin equal access to its tours based on his disability. Stevens added that allowing Martin to ride a golf cart during a PGA tournament would not fundamentally alter the rules of the PGA Tour. Stevens rejected the PGA's argument that the walking requirement in tour events was an integral part of PGA tournaments. Stevens cited a federal judge's ruling that Martin endured greater fatigue by riding in a cart because of his medical condition than his ablebodied competitors did by walking the golf course.