OPPapers.com

Fair V Rumsfeld

Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights

Introduction
Joshua Rosenkrantz, the lawyer and spokesperson for The Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights (FAIR), has publicly called the United States government "bigots" for maintaining the United States Military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Based on Rosenkrantz's point of view, we have predetermined victory for the "fair" players in the case of FAIR v. Bigots ; however, a more careful analysis past the slogans reveals a not only highly controversial and sophisticated, but also potentially paramount piece of ongoing litigation over the Solomon Amendment's and its subsequent constitutionality. The Solomon Amendment is a federal law that penalizes law schools which fail to permit military recruiters on campus by prohibiting the schools from receiving federal funds. As a result, many universities strenuously object to the Solomon Amendment because they are faced with the dilemma of allowing military recruiters on campus, an action which alienates their policies regarding sexual orientation discrimination, or losing federal funds. At the crux of this issue is the tension between the government's Constitutional power to raise and support an army and FAIR's First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and association. The government bases its argument on the Solomon Amendment's regulation of conduct, not speech, and the fact that any detriment to FAIR universities is trumped by the compelling governmental interest of recruiting top lawyers for the military, especially in this time of war. Conversely, FAIR asserts that the law is an unconstitutional condition because it violates their First Amendment rights by impeding the universities' rights of expressive association through compelling them to allow recruiters on campus whom do not adhere to their discrimination standards. By taking the case in May 2005, the Supreme Court will have to decide if the Third Circuit Court of Appeals erred in holding...