Military recruiters remain on campus

By Ryan Groshong

Harvard and Yale's law schools have both announced that they will ban military recruiters from their facilities following the overturn of the Solomon Amendment, leaving some to wonder why Santa Clara is not doing the same.

Prior to the passage of the 1995 amendment, many law schools banned military recruiters on the grounds that the military's "don't ask don't tell" policy discriminated against homosexuals.

The Solomon Amendment denies all federal funding, with the exception of student financial aid, from the departments of defense, labor, education, health and human services, homeland security and transportation to any university whose law school bans military recruiters.

Department of Defense spokesman Maj. Michael Shavers told The Santa Clara in a telephone interview that the military simply wanted to be on equal footing with other legal employers.

"The military would like to be able to recruit the brightest and best talent for the Department of Defense and military services," he said. "All we're asking is to able to compete on a level playing field with other large organizations that come to campus to recruit individuals."

In November 2004, the Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, an organization of 25 law faculties and law schools, won a 2-to-1 decision in the federal 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals finding the Solomon Amendment to be unconstitutional on the grounds that it violates a school's right of expression and freedom against coercive speech.

Just a day after the ruling, even though Harvard is not geographically within the third district, Harvard Law School Dean Elana Kagen announced that Harvard law school would return to its policy of banning any prospective employer who refuse to sign their non-discrimination pledge from using school facilities.

Yale Law school won a separate decision in Connecticut District Court on a suit filed by 44 law faculty members.

Like Harvard, Santa Clara law school has a non-discrimination pledge that they require all prospective employers to sign- except the military.

"We make every employer sign a non-discrimination clause, and every year everybody signs it," said Alexandria Bullara, Santa Clara law school's assistant dean of career services. "The military do one of two things: they either don't sign it, or they'll sign it and cross off sexual orientation."

Santa Clara Law School Dean Donald Polden cited the school's non-discrimination policy.

"I know that our policy at the law school has for a long time been that we don't permit discrimination against our students or graduates in employment, for any reason," he said. "The only exception of course, is the military."

Polden also believed that while Santa Clara law did not support the amendment, it was still necessary to abide by.

David Tsai, second year law student and president of the Bisexual Gay Lesbian Advocates believes that Santa Clara should do more to protest the law.

"When the administration is advocating a discriminatory policy they should be well aware of that, and they should change that. Especially when they see other schools having a change," he said.

Tsai thinks Santa Clara's Catholic identity could make the school less sensitive to this issue.

"People often use religion against LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transexual) individuals and use the Bible against them, so they don't see anything wrong with allowing military recruiters," he said.

Tsai did, however, point to other Jesuit schools taking active leadership roles protesting the Solomon Amendment.

FAIR was begun by a Boston College law professor, and members include the faculties of University of San Francisco Law and Georgetown Law.

But some think that losing federal funds would be too great of a risk to take.

"Schools have to do what they feel is right to protect the interest of all students," said Bullara.

Likewise, law professor Edward Steinman said he believed that while the faculty overwhelmingly does not support the Solomon Amendment, the loss of federal funding could be crippling to a university.

"You can't live without federal funds," he said. "The government spending power is very much an indirect coercion."

Polden also acknowledged the number of positions that are available in the military for law school graduates.

"The military has been a wonderful recruiter of law school graduates," he said. "Given the fact that there are that many people in the armed services, and given the pervasiveness of the military and their contracts and work with suppliers and that sort of thing, there's tremendous work, good work, for lawyers in the military."

Polden and Jim Briggs, executive assistant to university President Paul Locatelli S.J, agreed that there would be no change in Santa Clara's policy unless the case went to the Supreme Court.

"Santa Clara's position is that we will wait for legal jockeying to settle before any change in policy," said Briggs.

Briggs further stated that the university had no official position on whether or not the military's "don't ask don't tell" policy is discriminatory towards homosexuals.

"I don't think the administration has taken a position one way or another, it's not the kind of policy the university takes a position on," he said.

According to Shavers, "don't ask don't tell" is not a military policy, but rather a law that the military abides by.

"What it is is the law. It's not a Department of Defense or Pentagon policy. It's a congressionally approved, congressionally mandated law of the land," he said. "And the Department of Defense is complying with the law - it's not a question of whether we feel one way or the other."

Tsai believed that even though the policy was law, that didn't make it morally acceptable.

"Not all laws are fair, not all laws are just. We're talking about discriminatory laws," he said. "I think the schools are being forced to discriminate, to take part in discrimination."

* Contact Ryan Groshong at (408) 554-4546 or at rgroshong@scu.edu.