The United States military’s controversial ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy regarding homosexual recruitment is at the center of another precarious legal standoff, this time with college campuses as the battleground. A legal action group called the Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights (FAIR) is suing the U.S. Department of Defense over the Solomon Amendment. Passed in 1996, this amendment gives the Defense Department the power to cut federal funding to universities that do not allow military recruiters on their campuses.
The main argument of the lawsuit, lead by FAIR member and Boston College law professor Kent Greenfield, is that the Solomon Amendment effectively forces colleges to comply with ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ or risk losing valuable funding, even though ideologically, the policy would seem to violate a host of anti-discrimination laws in place on most campuses. Boston University, which has no direct involvement with the lawsuit, has, as spokesman Colin Riley said, enjoyed a cooperative relationship with military recruiters since before the advent of the Solomon Amendment.
While it may seem as though FAIR is taking a strong stance to prevent forcing a certain ideology on college students, it is actually the lawsuit itself that is, in theory, doing the forcing. The lawsuit will limit military recruiters’ access to prospective recruits based on an ideological conflict with a policy designed to stave off discrimination, not hard proof that the military’s policy promotes it.
The ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy is fundamentally misguided and these pages are not championing its idea, but it is however a policy that the United States military has chosen to adopt. That FAIR seems to be attacking the Defense Department for allowing the army to bring this policy to campuses seems less like a valid reason to limit military recruiters and more like evidence that FAIR should be attacking ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ itself, and not the channels by which that message may or may not travel.
The visibility of U.S. military recruitment is a valuable component to college campuses nationwide. College students are appealing to the military and vice-versa: recruiters try to find skilled, highly educated soldiers for the 21st century, and students are considering the next step in their future. Although the military would of course be able to reach potential recruits even if they were not allowed to do so on campuses, having the recruitment option on campus facilitates the process of students’ deciding if the military is for them. With information booths, on-site coordinators and representatives, students can ask questions, gain valuable insight and, perhaps most importantly, have the opportunity to debunk myths about serving their country.
The FAIR lawsuit does not seem to be taking the value of military recruiters into account; its parameters suggest that ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ is one of the defining aspects of the U.S. military, and it is not. The Solomon Amendment is a very small component to army recruitment programs, and is in place more to catalyze student-recruiter interaction, and not to pound away with pro-military rhetoric or ideological warfare. There is no logical correlation between the military wanting to recruit potential soldiers and pressing an agenda that many deem discriminatory. If students disagree with the military’s values, they probably will not be trying to get recruited anyway.
If FAIR sees success with its lawsuit, the military’s capability to reach college students will be limited. Military recruiters would have to appeal to university administrations directly to get exposure, which would wallow in even more ideological conflicts if, for example, an administration were anti-military. The Solomon Amendment is not negatively forceful, but rather in place to guarantee that whatever a university administration’s ideological issues might be with the military, they do not limit the chances of that university’s students to get involved if they so choose.
The leading idea in FAIR’s legal action against the Defense Department is that a policy adopted by the U.S. military is violating anti-discrimination policies in place at most college campuses across the country. But that ideological conflict is irrelevant to military recruiting itself. Students can think for themselves and make their own decisions about serving their country; the fact that military recruiters are trying to open students’ eyes to the idea of serving does not at all mean that they are forcing ideals upon them.
The members of FAIR should re-examine the nature of their argument and realize where their attacks are really aimed: the policy, not the recruiting. Future efforts on their part would make more sense if they took action against the source of their concern, and not the programs that are indirectly associated.