severely limit the transferee eligibility in general. The rules as presently constituted penalize a student-athlete who wishes to transfer for academic or religious reasons or for any number of other legitimate reasons. Surely, denying eligibility to such transferees in no way furthers IHSAA objectives. Sturrup, 261 Ind. at 468-469, 305 N.E.2d at 881. We concluded, “[T]he IHSAA’s decision to deny Warren Sturrup eligibility — in the absence of any evidence of ‘undue influence’ — can only be viewed as patently arbitrary and capricious, and must be reversed.” Sturrup, 261 Ind. at 470, 305 N.E.2d at 882. The Sturrup opinion has been the target of much criticism. See Thomas, 603 N.E.2d at 193 (“[T]he Sturrup court gave no reason for its departure from traditional equal p .2d 774 (La.1975) (<HOLDING>); Berschback, 154 Mich. App. 102, 397 N.W.2d
holding transfer rule did not violate federal equal protection as rule was uniformly applied not arbitrary and rationally related to legitimate government interest holding illinois high school associations version of the transfer rule did not violate federal equal protection holding transfer rule did not violate federal equal protection holding missouri transfer rule did not violate equal protection holding that the particular method is not rationally related to legitimate government interest if it is clearly arbitrary and unreasonable