The Supreme Court ruled Monday that military recruiters must be allowed on college campuses in order for universities to receive federal funding.
While the issue of military presence on campuses had not been a largely controversial issue, some universities worry that this may violate anti-discrimination and free speech policies because of the military’s policy on homosexuality.
Others feel that the decision should not be of concern as military recruiters already have presence on most college campuses.
“Recruiting already occurs on MSU campus,” freshman English major Joy Hood said. “Not necessarily to enlist, but to train and become an officer.”
Although recruitment may not cause a large controversy, the U.S. military has been open with its policies about homosexuality. While they operate on a “don’t ask, don’t tell” basis regarding sexual orientation, if evidence sur faces of homosexuality among service men or women, the accused will be immediately discharged.
“If someone doesn’t agree with former President Clinton’s don’t-ask-don’t-tell policy, then they should argue their case before the Supreme Court, not prevent the military from recruiting people who will go on to defend the very freedoms we seek to protect,” he said.
Some feel that this policy is unnecessary.
“I do think it’s wrong that they openly discourage homosexuality, because I don’t think that a person’s sexual orientation has anything to do with their ability to do a job or serve in the armed forces,” junior music education major Haley Agnew said.
In light of this, some feel that a university allowing military organizations to recruit on campus might be a violation of anti-discrimination policies.
Hood disagrees. She said she feels that the military should be able to recruit anywhere in the United States regardless of whether the host for the recruiting is in agreement with “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
“The military doesn’t actively seek out homosexuals,” Hood said. “It hires all types of people yet must maintain a professional appearance. The military can’t allow its representatives to be seen in a somewhat negative light by possibly the majority of the population.”
Chief Justice John Roberts, issuing his first major decision, stated that allowing military recruitment would not interfere with campus policies.
“Accommodating the military’s message does not affect the law schools’ speech because the schools are not speaking when they host interviews and recruiting receptions,” Roberts wrote. “Nothing about recruiting suggest the schools agree with any speech by recruiters, and nothing restricts what the schools may say about the military’s policies.”
Universities receive more than $35 billion in federal funding each year, money that allows universities to complete medical and scientific research. If governmental funding was revoked, MSU would lose many opportunities to advance in these fields.
“I see the necessity of having military recruiters on campus, but I think giving colleges an ultimatum-saying that you must allow military recruiters in order to receive government funding-is a ridiculous exertion of power by our government,” Agnew said.
Sanders expressed a different view.
“The best way for a private institution to protest this policy is not to accept federal funds,” he said. “Some say this can’t be done, but that’s not true. Hillsdale College in Michigan doesn’t accept federal funds and just recently made an exception for the federal student loan program. They have been self-sufficient for a while, and they would be free not to accept military recruiters if they chose.”