The U.S. Supreme Court case PGA Tour, Inc. v. Casey Martin revolved around the issue of whether the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) required the PGA Tour to allow golfer Casey Martin to use a golf cart during competition due to his disability - a circulatory disorder that impeded his ability to walk long distances. The PGA argued that walking was an integral part of the game and allowing Martin to use a cart would fundamentally alter it, while Martin contended that he was entitled reasonable accommodations under ADA law for equal opportunity participation in public events. In 2000, in a landmark decision favoring individuals with disabilities' rights over traditional sports rules, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of Martin stating that permitting him usage of a golf cart did not fundamentally alter the nature of tournament and thus should be allowed as per ADA's requirements for reasonable modifications.

The dissenting opinion in the PGA TOUR, INC. v. CASEY MARTIN case argued that the Supreme Court should not have intervened in defining rules for a professional sport like golf. The justices who dissented believed that it was not within their jurisdiction to determine what constitutes an essential aspect of a game and felt this decision should be left up to those who govern the sport itself - in this case, the PGA Tour. They contended that walking is indeed fundamental to golf as it contributes significantly to fatigue and stress experienced during play which impacts performance; hence allowing Martin's use of a cart would give him an unfair advantage over other players. Furthermore, they expressed concern about setting a precedent where courts could potentially interfere with rule-making authority of sports organizations or leagues.