Via the Duke Basketball Report, the premier sports fan site on the internet, I see this interesting story about a University of South Florida women's basketball player, Andrea Armstrong, who has converted to Islam and wants to wear long sleeves, long pants, and a head scarf while playing. She left the team when the coach wouldn't let her. (Well, actually, it looks like there's some dispute over whether she left or was booted, plus some question over how accomodating the school has been about her scholarship.)

What an interesting question. I hope Eugene Volokh tells me what the right answer is, but I'll take a stab at it in my sleep-deprived state. Speaking of states, we know that the NCAA isn't a state actor (Tarkanian), but USF is. My guess is that USF can condition the receipt of an athletic scholarship on a player's compliance with all NCAA rules, even if those rules might infringe on the player's constitutional rights. (The easiest example is that the NCAA can restrict an athlete's right to shill for a product -- normally the athlete would have the free speech right to do so, but the NCAA can say that doing so would cost the player his or her amateur status, and schools can implement that rule without running afoul of the First Amendment.) The NCAA rules state that all team members must wear the same uniform, so Armstrong's refusal to comply means she can't compete without breaking the rules.

But it gets murkier when we note that the NCAA makes allowances in other cases. It allows BYU and Campbell to avoid playing on Sundays in the basketball championship tournament, because those schools have religious objections to playing on the Sabbath. And, as the linked article and the DBR note, former Towson State basketball player Tamir Goodman, an orthodox Jew, played in a yarmulke, even though that wasn't a part of the team's uniform.

USF now says it will petition the NCAA on Armstrong's behalf for an exception. That's nice of them, because I don't think they have any obligation to do so. My bet is that Armstrong is a good enough player for them to be willing to go the extra mile on this, but that may be too cynical.

Two other thoughts. First, I don't remember enough common law contracts stuff (where are you, bar exam crammers?), but I wonder if Armstrong might have a breach of contract suit against the school here (assuming they did in fact drop her scholarship on these grounds). Again, I'm sure that conformity with all NCAA rules is a requirement for continued receipt of the money. Second, what about a procedural due process claim? It sounds like her dismissal from the team was entirely up to the coach (probably a good idea), but it also doesn't sound like there is any policy in place for review of these decisions. This may be why Armstrong has been reinstated. If we assume her scholarship is a property interest, the school might have been concerned about liability for depriving her of that interest without any real process, especially when its decision could be painted as religious discrimination.

These are just some unformed and unresearched musings on the issue. I'll try to remember to keep track of it and see what happens, but I have my doubts that we'll see Ms. Armstrong on the court fully clothed. I welcome your thoughts.