A private university with state accreditation and partial funding argues that its conduct should not be treated as state action for Fourteenth Amendment purposes. Which statement best reflects this position?

A private university with state accreditation and partial funding argues that its conduct should not be treated as state action for Fourteenth Amendment purposes. Which statement best reflects this position?

• A. Accreditation automatically makes all private university actions state action.
• B. State funding alone makes the university a state actor in all contexts.
• C. The combination of accreditation and partial funding renders it a state actor for all acts.
• D. In general, accreditation and partial funding do not turn a private university's conduct into state action.

Answer: (D)

State action under the Fourteenth Amendment requires more than government involvement; the private conduct must be so entwined with the state or be performing a function traditionally done by the state that it can be treated as governmental. Accreditation by a state agency and partial funding are forms of involvement, but by themselves they do not automatically transform a private university’s actions into state action. The general rule is that private entities remain private unless there is a closer nexus—such as the private institution performing a traditional public function or the government exercising coercive power or extensive control—that makes the conduct effectively governmental. So, accrediting and funding, without more, do not turn the university’s conduct into state action. There could be exceptions if the state’s involvement is so pervasive that the university acts as an arm of the state, but that is not the typical result.

State action under the Fourteenth Amendment requires more than government involvement; the private conduct must be so entwined with the state or be performing a function traditionally done by the state that it can be treated as governmental. Accreditation by a state agency and partial funding are forms of involvement, but by themselves they do not automatically transform a private university’s actions into state action. The general rule is that private entities remain private unless there is a closer nexus—such as the private institution performing a traditional public function or the government exercising coercive power or extensive control—that makes the conduct effectively governmental. So, accrediting and funding, without more, do not turn the university’s conduct into state action. There could be exceptions if the state’s involvement is so pervasive that the university acts as an arm of the state, but that is not the typical result.