Posted on 12/06/2005 8:23:41 PM PST by MissouriConservative
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court appeared ready Tuesday to uphold a law that says colleges cannot turn away military recruiters in protest of the Pentagon's policy on gays if the universities also want to receive federal money.
New Chief Justice John Roberts said schools unhappy with the "don't ask, don't tell" policy have a simple solution: turn down federal cash.
And Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who is retiring, said colleges can post disclaimers on campus noting their objections to military policy.
Law school campuses have become the latest battleground over the policy allowing gay men and women to serve in the military only if they keep their sexual orientation to themselves.
Solicitor General Paul Clement said that when the government picks up the tab for things like research and education grants, the military also is entitled to demand "a fair shot" in terms of equal access for its recruiters to a university's "best and brightest."
Clement said the military is receiving nothing more than any other donor would expect.
A few justices, including David Souter, worried that the free speech rights of law schools could be hindered by Congress' action of tying funding to military recruiters' access.
"The law schools are taking a position on First Amendment grounds, and that position is in interference with military recruiting, no question about it," Souter said.
More court members seemed concerned about military recruitment in the post-Sept. 11 world.
Federal financial support of colleges tops $35 billion a year, and many college leaders say they could not forgo that money.
About a half dozen supporters of the law, all members of the same Topeka, Kan., family, waved signs, with slogans like "America is Doomed," and yelled at reporters and passers-by in front of the court before the argument. They dragged behind them U.S. flags tied around their ankles as they paced the wet sidewalk.
"The Supreme Court shouldn't even have to debate about this," said Rebekah Phelps-Roper, 18.
Some students camped out overnight to get seats for the argument. Dan Noble, 26, a gay Yale Law School student said that "you feel discriminated against when some recruiters will interview your fellow students but won't interview you."
Immediately after the argument, the Supreme Court released an audio tape to news organizations because of interest in the case. Cameras are not allowed in court.
Many law schools forbid the participation of recruiters from public agencies and private companies that have discriminatory policies.
Law schools have "a Hobson's choice: Either the university must forsake millions of dollars of federal funds largely unrelated to the law school, or the law school must abandon its commitment to fight discrimination," justices were told in a filing by the Association of American Law Schools.
The federal law, known as the Solomon Amendment after its first congressional sponsor, mandates that universities, including their law and medical schools and other branches, give the military the same access as other recruiters or forfeit money from federal agencies like the Education, Labor and Transportation departments.
Dozens of groups have filed briefs on both sides of the case, the first gay-rights related appeal since a contentious 2003 Supreme Court ruling that struck down laws criminalizing gay sex.
The latest case stems from a lawsuit against the Pentagon by a group of law schools and professors claiming their free-speech rights are being violated, on grounds they are forced to associate with military recruiters or promote their campus appearances.
Free-speech cases are often divisive at the court. If Samuel Alito, President Bush's nominee to succeed O'Connor, is confirmed by the Senate before the case is decided he could be called on to break any tie vote.
A panel of the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found it was reasonably likely that the law violated free speech rights. Alito serves on that appeals court but was not involved in the case.
"I think the best thing the government could do is require universal transfer and standardization of credits for all colleges small and large that receive federal funds."
No. I am a conservative. The less the government messes with higher education, the better. There are all sorts of colleges and universities operating at all levels of difficulty and expense.
My daughter is a senior at Rice University. She is majoring in Chemical Engineering. Rice is a good school and she is getting a good education. Rice has also been very good in providing aids and loans so that it has not been too hard for us to pay for her education.
She already has a job offer in hand. The offer includes a handsome signing bonus. She will be able to pay off all her loans in her first year of employment and after that it is all gravy.
Here's more reporting that I found very helpful and interesting
http://www.law.com/jsp/dc/PubArticleDC.jsp?id=1133863507954
http://betsyspage.blogspot.com/2005/12/initial-reaction-seems-to-indicate.html
John Roberts is fantastic!
Yeah but most of it probably went to help fund the college Presidents Salaries.
Actually, it goes to the heart of the "1st Amendment" claim of the universities. O'Connor's statement shows that the univeristy has options available to it (citing one particular example) that don't require banning recruiters outright, therefore there is no compelling reason, even if the university's argument is accepted, to overturn the law.
Typical of "tolerant" liberal Souter: turning free speech rights on its head. The schools can say whatever they want, anytime they want. What the schools want to do, however, is take away the ability for and/or refuse access to individuals and entities, as well as their own students, to "speak" out on issues about which the school liberals don't agree.
Congratulations on your Masters. I think for some careers college is the only option but I also know that for considerably less a person can get certified in a specialized IT technology and be making 6 figures in less than 2 years. I can't imagine the shock (though it shouldn't be) for a liberal arts major when they get out of school and realize they aren't going to be making the big bucks basket weaving.
Well they are already messing with it and they are unlikely to quit messing with it. I'm glad things have worked out for your daughter you should be proud. I believe that when the government provides tax money to institutions of higher education they should attach certain strings. One of the most frustrating things is to spend what is thought to be huge amounts of money to find that only a fraction of your credits transfer.
Thanks! I'll certainly take a look.
"...the law school must abandon its commitment to fight discrimination,..."
So let me get this straight here ...
If I don't get high scores on my SAT or meet academic prerequisites for admission into said law school, and I don't have the several hundred thousand bux for tuition, then they are going to DISCRIMINATE against me and not let me study there at my leisure and award me a degree / licence in due course (whether I deserve one or not)?
And they are going to DISCRIMINATE against military Recruiters who only want to save their sorry snotty liberal elite heiniez from Islammofacist extermination by not letting them set foot on their sacred campi?
All the while having their sanctamonious bloomers in a twist because the US Military is a little hesitant to allow the militant, communist wing of the homosexual lobby to infiltrate and take over our Nations' defence (as they apparantly have American academia)?
And these are the same elitist endoctrination centers that are churning out the majority of our politicians and judges??!
God help us!... Quick; before He is ruled unconstitutional and run out of town along with the homophobic Recruiting Sergeant!
:-) You are most welcome.
If Scalia is anything like Roberts, Sociocrat and RINO Senators are going to start wearing AlQuida bomb-vests to the Chamber when he comes up for nomination.
Of course "Teddy" may not need one; all he has to do is cut a rank one and light it off behind the podium.
Famous last words from the Senior Balloon from Maaahsachuusetts;
"AaaahLAAAaaaaah - AAAAAhhchbaaaaaah!!!"
(**PPPPPFFFXFPTZZZPX** - *flickabic* - ****FA-BLOOIE!!!****)
Oy; it won't be pretty! {B^{P~
Seriesly tho; "Frantic desperation" on the left may be an understatement.
The true irony here is that colleges practice discrimination on a daily basis. There are quotas for admission, classes centered on certain ethnic groups, and groups and clubs by the hundreds dedicated to everyone and everything but the evil white guys or conservative.
Thank you. My ultimate goal is to teach, to pass on the knowledge to the next generations. You are correct to about the 6 figures in the IT field, although those positions are increasingly going the way of the dodo. Companies are using visas to bring in IT educated immigrants to lower costs. Those positions that are out there are ones that are calling for decades of experience and most have a list of obscure or out of date technologies that you must know.
It's a jungle out there....lol
It is all about where you want to go and what you are willing to do to get and keep the jobs that are available. The company I work for employs some "IT educated immigrants" but they only represent a small fraction of the total workforce and those I've worked with have a work ethic that is hard to beat.
The key thing to remember is that one has to be willing to grow and move on to make more money in IT. If one stays on at a help desk for years on end and have no intention to push upward into management then its hard to blame guys from India for low wages. I started as an unpaid intern working a pizza job and going to school with a new baby daughter. When others went home and gave up on problems, I stayed and found the answers to them. It is not easy but it is a choice; complain and give up or do what you have to do.
I went to school with a guy, a good friend of mine, who was ex military, his wife was in jail for drug use, and he had walk across town sometimes to take his daughter to preschool just so he could go to school. He was a black single father who didn't have a car and little money and I never once heard him complain or bellyache, he did what he had to do and it was an honor to graduate with him.
Don't wait for someone to hand you the answer, go find it, don't wait for someone to give you what you want go get it.
...and this could be hugh! :)
But the problem is that there that was never the issue. They are arguing that free speech issue as a distraction. She was clearly fooled by it, as you are. Chief Justice Roberts was not. The question is solely whether Congress may fund education with strings attached, other Constitutional restrictions notwithstanding. This is long-settled law; it can.
"Actually, it goes to the heart of the "1st Amendment" claim of the universities. O'Connor's statement shows that the univeristy has options available to it (citing one particular example) that don't require banning recruiters outright, therefore there is no compelling reason, even if the university's argument is accepted, to overturn the law."
But the problem is that was never the issue. They are arguing that free speech issue as a distraction from the real issue. She was clearly fooled by it, as you are. Chief Justice Roberts was not. The question is solely whether Congress may fund education with strings attached, other Constitutional restrictions notwithstanding. This is long-settled law; it can.
How did this garbage ever get to the SC?
There is no Constitutional there there.
I'm not being fooled by anything. I know the 1st Amendment argument is specious. Nevertheless, it's still a relatively common practice to say something along the lines of: assuming everything the plaintiff says is true (and relevant), has the plaintiff shown that they have been or will be harmed. In this case, the answer is: no, even if we accept the specious arguments of the plaintiff, the remedy requested is not necessary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.