Supreme Court upholds college military recruiting law

[SingleWhiteFemale]

Supreme Court upholds college military recruiting law
(http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/06/scotus.campus.recruiters.ap/index.html)
Monday, March 6, 2006; Posted: 11:16 a.m. EST (16:16 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Colleges which 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 Supreme Court ruled Monday.

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

Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the court, said that the campus visits are an effective military recruiting tool.

"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," he wrote.

... more at linkAm I the only one upset? I saw the breaking news banner on CNN.com this morning and felt like I was going to lose my breakfast.

[msnicolea]

It's bullshit. As long as the military engages in blatant discrimination, it has NO place recruiting on our college campuses.

[IrisHope]

I'm just disgusted

[looch]

Do any of you know if there is a list of universities that recieve federal funding? I am curious as to how widespread it is.

[msnicolea]

I suspect that 99% of all public and private universities receive at least some federal funding.

[looch]

Wow, 99%, that seems really high! Off to do some searching!

[msnicolea]

Even private schools receive federal aid (finiancial aid, grants, etc. . .)--not as much as state schools, but enough that rules apply to them.

[amew]

Wow, 99%, that seems really high! Off to do some searching!

I suspect that is pretty accurate. I know my private undergrad institution and my private law school both had tons of federal funding. At one point the Bush Administration was threatening to pull federal grants awarded to research scientists affiliated with universities if they did not allow military recruiting, so I think the effects of this decision are actually extremely far-reaching.

[looch]

No luck on google today! Thanks for the insight though, girls!

[fuzzy]

I maintain the federal certrifications/assurances for the college where I am employed. When they say "accepts federal funding" they include any federally-funded/subsidized student aid, as the aid is funneled through the institution to the student.

They also mean any federal grants won by the faculty, as the grant awards are made to the institution on behalf of the faculty member/principal investigator.

So, in order to be excluded from this grouping, the instittuion would have to have no federally funded research projects, no federally supported student, and no lobbying activities. I think that includes just about every nationally accredited instution I can think of...

[allyray231]

Real nice--

[thelittlebabu]

Interesting (or telling, take your pick) that the decision was unanimous. This wasn't a decision divided along political lines.

[PG-rated]

I'm actually kind of torn on this. I do think the government has the right to attach conditions to the funding it provides to colleges and universities, but of course I disagree with the military's discriminatory practices. In a way, I feel like this court decision frees the schools to comply with the condition without endorsing it in any way, since it's not as if they have a choice.

[artist]

That sucks.

Well, if you are a parent you might be interested in "Leave My Child Alone"
http://themmob.org/lmca/ to opt your child out of being approached by military recruiters.