Yale Law School Grudgingly allows Military Recruiters
[Guest post by DRJ]
Recognizing that it is the right thing to do it could lose funding, Yale Law School will allow military recruiters on campus:
“Yale Law School will end its policy of not working with military recruiters following a court ruling this week that jeopardized about $300 million in federal funding, school officials said Wednesday.
Yale and other universities had objected to the Pentagon’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that allows gay men and women to serve in the military only if they keep their sexual orientation to themselves. Yale Law School had refused to assist military recruiters because the Pentagon wouldn’t sign a nondiscrimination pledge.
The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Yale on Monday, rejecting its argument that its right to academic freedom was infringed by federal law that says universities must give the military the same access as other job recruiters or forfeit federal money.”
Yale Law School administrators and faculty aren’t happy about this:
“The fact is we have been forced under enormous pressure to acquiescence in a policy that we believe is deeply offensive and harmful to our students,” said Robert Burt, a Yale law professor who was lead plaintiff in the case. The funding loss would have devastated the university’s medical research into cancer, heart disease and other illnesses, Burt said.
Yale Law Dean Harold Koh said in a news release Wednesday that he was disappointed by the appeals court decision, saying the school has an obligation to “ameliorate the impact” of discriminatory hiring practices. “We intend to meet this obligation and will work alongside our students to identify the best ways of doing so, in accordance with the law,” Koh said. “We continue to look forward to the day when all members of our community will have an equal opportunity to serve in our nation’s armed forces.” Koh did not immediately respond to calls seeking additional comment.”
The Air Force has already scheduled interviews for Monday, and I expect there will be protests and media coverage in New Haven when that happens. I doubt the Air Force interviewers are expecting Yale Law School to put out the welcome mat.
— DRJ
Very good news!
voiceofreason (ff729f) — 9/20/2007 @ 10:14 pmYale surrenders principle for the sake of principal. All of us here are disappointed. But are we surprised? C’mon Yale, show us you have the right stuff: bar the recruiters and forego that $300 mil. It’s the right thing to do! 🙂
Iapetus (ea6f31) — 9/20/2007 @ 10:41 pmHey, if Columbia is willing to meet with a Holocaust-denying, terrorist-supporting crackpot from Iran, why shouldn’t Yale be willing to meet with US military recruiters?
DubiousD (940370) — 9/20/2007 @ 10:49 pmHeadline should read:
Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 9/20/2007 @ 11:01 pmYale Abandons Principles for Money.
I oppose DADT and believe that the currently annunciated Pentagon rationale for it is ridiculous. Still, Yale’s manner of protest — to deprive its students of relevant, truthful information about their future — was even sillier. Not to mention that its arguments had already been shot down by the Supreme Court in Rumsfeld v. FAIR.
nk (2f5778) — 9/21/2007 @ 2:57 amPoor Yale. What would they do without those Federal dollars? They had their principles, but they can’t live without that money. There is no other option.
Or is there. Grove City College gave up Federal funding to preserve their independence years ago. They learned to live without it and they are thriving. I suppose that solution never occurred to the elites at Yale who care so much about their independence.
Amphipolis (fdbc48) — 9/21/2007 @ 4:18 amWhile I sit and bask in the homecoming of my son from Iraq today, I marvel at the stupid, self-serving people and institutions that he helped to defend. Columbia won’t expose it’s students to the ROTC of the their country, won’t participate in the their own country’s defense, yet will have any manner of despots, dictators and hate mongers spew all over their precious student body. What hacks, what liars what two faced a**holes.
paul from fl (95ebb3) — 9/21/2007 @ 4:29 amAs for as Yale is concerned. Screw ’em. They should be made to understand that providing the best and the brightest for the defense of this country should be construed as a privlege not something they need to be coerced into, or bribed into.
I have come to the conclusion that higher “Education” is simply and expression of ones ambition, and willingness to whore oneself for a reward. Based on the behavior of the learned professors at these colleges, they certainly aren’t any smarter than when they were freshmen. yeeeeesh
“Poor Yale. What would they do without those Federal dollars? ”
Charge their students a lot more. Education is a principle for some.
amarc (10527e) — 9/21/2007 @ 4:30 amYale’s endowment is $18 Billion. They don’t need Federal money and they don’t need to charge tuition, but the high-minded Yale elitists do it anyway.
Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 9/21/2007 @ 4:53 amA perfect example of The Golden Rule – Those who have the gold make the rules
Horatio (55069c) — 9/21/2007 @ 5:15 amYale is also one of the colleges that subtracted knowledge of US history during the four years they had them. Columbia will not allow ROTC because the military will not allow gays to serve openly but invites the president of Iran, which hangs gays, to speak. It’s all about Bush, of course.
Mike K (86bddb) — 9/21/2007 @ 5:17 amAs perfect sense mentions, Yale’s endowment is so large that they can run the school, without charging anyone tuition, in perpetuity.
Yale, if it actually had any principles at all, can afford to follow them.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/21/2007 @ 6:00 amIn Rumsfeld v. FAIR (opening paragraphs of Part III of the opinion — sorry cannot copy from .pdf) the Supreme Court more than implies that just because Congress chose to excercise its power to raise armies, in these instances, indirectly through the Spending Clause that it was limited to doing that. The Congress could obligate campuses to allow military recruiters even wihtout the carrot of federal funds.
nk (2f5778) — 9/21/2007 @ 6:45 amIt’s the rest of America who should be complaining about the military recruiting at Yale Law School. We need more lawyers in the military like we need another Pearle Harbor.
j curtis (ecc9cc) — 9/21/2007 @ 6:53 amHoratio, leaving you the benefit of the doubt here on your meaning, those with the Gold did not make the rules for using the money, just accepting it…if Yale doesn’t like the rules, they don’t have to follow them….they just don’t get the money…
So, the rules are not inflexible…
reff (bff229) — 9/21/2007 @ 7:00 amPerhaps Yale can “learn something” from the other side, the military, like they “learned something” from the Yale Taliban.
Patricia (4117a9) — 9/21/2007 @ 8:12 amAlways figured that DADT was simply a pretext that Yale used to keep those icky recruiters off campus.
Paul, congrats. Please extend him my thanks and esteem.
Uncle Pinky (3c2c13) — 9/21/2007 @ 9:16 amGood point – I was referring to the rules on accepting the $$
Horatio (a549f7) — 9/21/2007 @ 9:27 am“Those who put a wall between their soldiers and their schools have their thinking done by cowards and their fighting done by fools.”
-attributed to Thucydides.
Alternatively:
Thucydides quoting a Spartan king, roughly paraphrased as “Nations who draw a great distinction between its thinkers and its warriors have its thinking done by cowards and its battles fought by fools.”
Horatio (a549f7) — 9/21/2007 @ 9:31 am8, amarc – Charge their students a lot more
Tuition and aid are set to match what students can pay. If Yale lost Federal aid, Yale would have to lower tuition or increase aid in order to attract the best students. Case in point – Princeton recently increased their student aid dramatically, and their applications have soared. Supply and demand.
There are schools that are thriving with low tuition and no Federal aid whatsoever. Incidentally, Grove City seniors did a lot better than Yale seniors on the survey linked by Mike K in post 11 above.
Amphipolis (fdbc48) — 9/21/2007 @ 10:31 amPaul from FL #7:
Please tell your son “Thank you, well done, and welcome home.”
DRJ (ec59b5) — 9/21/2007 @ 10:57 amActually Amphipolis that’s not quite true. Tuition and aid are set to make sure that “minority” students get free rides while hard working people who got in without the benefit of lowered standards, a rich daddy, or an officially approved skin color are offered a chance to go $150k into debt for the privilege of attending for three years….
TheManTheMyth (9a7d6a) — 9/21/2007 @ 3:27 pmJust a reminder…
DADT was legislated by a Democrat Party controlled Congress in 1993, and signed by Bill Clinton. This is not something thought up by the “Vast Right Wing Conspiracy” and rammed down the throat of the body politic.
Another Drew (758608) — 9/21/2007 @ 6:41 pmThat’s slightly disingenuous, Another Drew. DADT was considered a compromise and an improvement of the former military policy, where gays were automatically drummed out of the military, no matter what.
Are you suggesting we had a more open policy for gays in the military before 1993?
lc (1401be) — 9/21/2007 @ 6:47 pmI’m sorry to disagree, AD. DADT was a compromise between a pre-existing complete ban on homosexuals in the military and Billy’s inept attepts to repeal it. As a good compromise, it left neither side happy. For my part, if some nineteen year-old obeys his orders, totes his own pack and walks point through a mine-field I couldn’t care less what cocks his gun.
nk (2f5778) — 9/21/2007 @ 6:48 pmNow i hope they make those university muttonheads personaly appologise for baring the military and i hope the sock it to U.C. SANTA CRUZ and U.C. BERKELEY as well
krazy kagu (444070) — 9/23/2007 @ 11:33 am