Breaking - Supreme Court Upholds "Colleges who accept Federal Funds must allow Military Recruiters"

FoxNews ^ | 03/06/2006 | Leofl

[Leofl]

Just Breaking!!!! Supreme Court Upholds "Colleges who accept Federal Funds must allow Military Recruiters"

[HoustonCurmudgeon]

Not directly, but the same arguments used against military recruiters are made by those against ROTC, and those arguments have been demolished.

I'm not sure that's correct as ROTC requires a financial contribution from the school. I don't think you can force that.

[HoustonCurmudgeon]

The 8-0 will only last until Alito gets up to speed.

[JCEccles]

8-0, with Ginsburg snoring?

Okay. The vote was actually 7 to Zzzz.

[supercat]

When it somes to military recruiters, that is good, but when it comes to _______ fill in the blank, it could be bad.

I would suggest that a proper thing for a court to decide would be that prudent expenditure of federal funds requires that they be allocated only according to prospective uses' ability to meet legitimate federal objectives.

If the federal government is looking to purchase some 3/8" cable for the Defense Department, and a U.S. manufacturer charges $0.05/foot more than a Chinese one, one might justify spending the extra money for the U.S. goods on the basis that the supply would be less likely to be interrupted in case of a international conflict. On the other hand, it would be hard to justify spending an extra $0.02/foot more for a certain company's cable on the basis that the company was minority-owned.

Using that standard, requiring recipients of federal funds to accept recruiters on campus would be legitimate, since putting recruiters in contact with college students is a legitimate federal objective. Requiring colleges receiving federal funds to have gay-indoctrination seminars would not be a legitimate requirement, since such seminars would not contribute toward any legitimate federal objective.

[The_Reader_David]

Actually, in mathematics, political discussions are quite civil. My political stance was well-known in the department, since I've been a conservative since my days there as a grad student. (I wrote an article for the first edition
of the Red and Blue, Penn's early 1980's conservative alternative paper.)

[dervish]

This is GREAT news.

[danamco]

NEXT: Prayers back in schools!!!

[danamco]

Any bets Ginsburg didn't go for this?!?!




She was napping (snoring)!!!

[supercat]

"This case does not require us to determine when a con dition placed on university funding... becomes an unconstitutional condition. It is clear that a funding condition cannot be unconstitutional if it could be constitutionally imposed directly... the First Amendment would not prevent Congress from directly imposing the Solomon Amendment's access requirement, "

The direct decision may not have been affected by the new conservatives on the court, but under the previous judges the stated rationalle--and thus the precedent set--could have been different. It might well have sought to cement federal supremacy.

BTW, out of curiosity, if a decision is 8-0 but the primary decision is supported by four judges and a concurrence by the four others, what determines precedent?

[Cinnamon]

Yes! there is a God! If these school want suck on the tits of the taxpayer then they must comply with country duties

[peggybac]

But the soccer moms (aka Cindy Sheehan) will be p!ssed.

Cindy now has a brand new venue - instead of speaking at one or two schools, she's got hundreds in each state. We're never going to get rid of this woman.

[onyx]

Exactly, but the vote was 8-0 --- Justice Alito wasn't on the bench when the arguments took place. Nonetheless, it was a unanimous vote!

[California Patriot]

A nice, nice bytch slap to liberal academe.

The unanimity is impressive. Stunning, in fact.

[paudio]

Roberts have been successful at having several unanimous decisions. Apparently, his collegiality is real.

I read somewhere that before Roberts, a decision was decided in only 5-10 mins without much discussion. The justices had already had idea how they were going to vote, and sticked to it. But now, perhaps Roberts instituted a discussion first which allows some justices to consider arguments put forward by the other justices.

[jackieaxe]

Even if you do not receive a dime in federal money, military recruiters should be allowed on your campus as part of being a good citizen.

[JoeGar]

The dope-smoking, maggot-infested, ACLU lawyer types lose one for a change.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

Cornell's response:

"We are terribly disappointed that the Supreme Court chose to uphold the Solomon Amendment," said Simeon Moss '73, Cornell press office director. "Cornell joined other universities to challenge the constitutionality of the amendment. [The University] continues to uphold the longstanding anti-discrimination policy."

Ithaca is the City of Evil.

[jigsaw]

[The University] continues to uphold the longstanding anti-discrimination policy.

Except against the military, of course.

[ExpatCanuck]

The 8-0 will only last until Alito gets up to speed.

You have some misgivings about Alito?

[Soaring Feather]

YES!!!