Acadamia VS. US Military
The Supreme Court ruled unanimously today that colleges that accept federal money must allow military recruiters on campus, despite university objections to the Pentagon’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays. The “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy was introduced as a compromise measure in 1993 by President Bill Clinton. Thirty-six law schools together sued to challenge the equal- access policy, saying the schools have campus policies of not assisting employers who discriminate based on race, sex or sexual orientation.
Sidebar: But is the policy discriminatory? The fact is that the military cannot discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation and recruiters cannot inquire into a potential recruitee’s sexual orientation. Case in point: take these 7 Fort Bragg paratroopers who are being discharged from the Army, not for being homosexual, but for engaging in behavior unbecoming a US soldier; that is, engaging in sex on a pornographic gay web site. The same outcome would result in a heterosexual case.
Back to the story.
The Supreme Court rejected a free-speech challenge from law school professors who claimed they should not be forced to associate with military recruiters or promote their campus appearances. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the decision for the court:
“Students and faculty are free to associate to voice their disapproval of the military’s message; nothing about the statute affects the composition of the group by making group membership less desirable. The Solomon Amendment therefore does not violate a law school’s First Amendment rights. A military recruiter’s mere presence on campus does not violate a law school’s right to associate, regardless of how repugnant the law school considers the recruiter’s message.”
The dispute centered on the Solomon Amendment, first enacted by Congress in 1994 to pressure universities into allowing military recruiters on campus. The Bush administration gave the law renewed emphasis after the 2001 terrorist attacks, insisting that military representatives get the same treatment as other recruiters. Congress later wrote that equal-access requirement into law.
Roberts said the schools “attempted to stretch a number of First Amendment doctrines well beyond the sort of activities these doctrines protect.â€Â
The federal government provides almost $35 billion a year to universities through research grants, government contracts and other sources. The financial stake is one reason almost every law school has agreed to give equal access to the military.
The truth behind the lawsuit, as Chief Justice Roberts wrote in the court’s opinion, is that academia increasingly finds the military repugnant. While taking aid and grants in the form of money from the federal government, many of these “schools of higher learning” loathe the military despite the obvious paradox in that the freedom to speak and be heard is safeguarded not by university professors, but by the AMERICAN SOLDIER. It looks like academia, Cindy Sheehan and the Leave My Child Alone campaign are on the wrong side of the issue again.
Cross-posted at Amy’s Blog
March 6th, 2006 at 9:46 pm
Campus Military Recruiting Law Upheld
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled that colleges that accept federal money must allow military recr
March 7th, 2006 at 8:49 am
Not a whole bunch of schools are going to be willing to give up their slice of the pie, but that’s not what concerns me here.
My concern is the lack of control those in authority maintain in the face of the growing intensity of “protests”. If the same behavior exhibited by these “protesters” were committed on the street toward average citizens, the “protesters” would be thrown in jail with at least a minimum charge of assault, which is what it is.
Why is it that tactics much less threatening, when used against an abortion clinic, become felonious, but are “free speech” when used by these anarchist bastards?
It’s obvious they will never change their views because they have their own “gods” on their side and communicate directly with such (fanaticism is that way), but to prevent any discourse with which they disagree is so evil they can’t even see it.
Let’s hope some day, somewhere, some law enforcement people will start paying attention to the definition of assault, and arrest accordingly. Might even help to have an Ivory Tower-type or two stand up for that, too.