Another Good Decision

AP: Court Upholds Campus Military Recruiting---

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that the government can force colleges to open their campuses to military recruiters despite university objections to the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays.

Justices rejected a free-speech challenge from law schools and professors who claimed they should not have to associate with military recruiters or promote their campus appearances.

(emphasis added)

Hmm, I was unaware that allowing military recruiters on campus meant that the professors had to associate with them. Is there some rule to this affect?

Because the only thing I know is that universities that take federal money are supposed to allow military recruiters to set up little recruiting stands, as all sorts of groups, clubs, and organizations do, and try to recruit students. I've never heard of military recruiters trying to recruit the professors. And we all know the professors are a big bunch of lefty wimps---not exactly the type one wants in the military (Unless one is in France, of course).

But, really, who forces professors to "associate with military recruiters or promote their campus appearances"? I've only ever had professors promote Leftist speakers and events. If anything, professors and administrators usually promote Leftist things, while denying "Conservative" speakers, groups, etc., the same rights. When I was in college, I always got all-campus e-mails detailing Lib events and speakers. But, when the College Republicans had an event, we always met with problems: either the people forgot to send our e-mail or wouldn't or this happened or that.

So much for academic freedom and equality.

Chief Justice John Roberts said that campus visits are an effective recruiting tool. And, he said, "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 8-0 decision upheld a federal law that says universities must give the military the same access as other recruiters or forfeit federal money.

Justices ruled even more broadly, saying that Congress could directly demand military access on campus without linking the requirement to federal money.

"When you're in the middle of war, even if it's not a terribly popular one, courts are hesitant to tie the hands of the military," said Jon Davidson, legal director of gay rights group Lambda Legal.

Jay Sekulow, chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, called the decision "an important victory for the military and ultimately for our national security."

The military's policy had put college leaders in a thorny situation because of campus rules that forbid participation of recruiters representing agencies or private companies that have discriminatory policies.

Most college leaders have said they could not afford to lose federal help, some $35 billion a year.

Roberts, writing his third decision since joining the court last fall, said there are other less drastic options for protesting the policy. "Students and faculty are free to associate to voice their disapproval of the military's message," he wrote.

Joshua Rosenkranz, the attorney for the challengers of the law, said that the case called attention to the military policy. "A silver lining to the Supreme Court's opinion is the court made it clear," he said, "law schools are free to organize protests."

Geoffrey Shields, dean of Vermont Law School, said the school since 1999 has given up some federal money and will continue to bar recruiters "as a symbol of the importance of fair treatment of all people."

"We've stuck to our guns and I anticipate we'll continue to stick to our guns," he said.

Roberts' decision carefully sidestepped taking a stand on the policy itself, although he explained in a footnote that under don't ask, don't tell, "a person generally may not serve in the Armed Forces if he has engaged in homosexual acts, stated that he is a homosexual, or married a person of the same sex."

The court roundly rejected arguments that the policy raised important First Amendment free-speech issues for school leaders.

"Compelling a law school that sends scheduling e-mails for other recruiters to send one for a military recruiter is simply not the same as forcing a student to pledge allegiance, or forcing a Jehovah's Witness to display the motto 'Live Free or Die,'" Roberts wrote.

Roberts filed the only opinion, which was joined by every justice but Samuel Alito. Alito did not participate because he was not on the bench when the case was argued three months ago

This is a good test of just how strong the opinions of these "academics" are. If they allow the military recruiters on campus, so as to receive federal money, then they really are not sticking with their (usually disgusting) principles. The more principled stand would be to continue barring military recruiters, lose the federal money, and suffer the consequences.

On second thought, I wish they would stick to their guns (wait, I doubt they approve of guns). . . stick to their peace pipes and just say no to federal money. That money could go to more worthy universities and students. Not to mention, perhaps these Lefty universities would have to close for lack of funds . . . and lack of students.