I thought this was an interesting development. When I was at law school at Boston College, this was really controversial. People were adament on both sides of the issue. In the end, faced with a potential loss of federal funding, the school decided to allow the military to come on campus during the recruiting period to entice law students to sign up for and interview for JAG positions. Now that the Solomon Amendment has been struck down and Harvard has reinstituted its ban, I'll be interested to see if other colleges, universities and law schools do likewise.
Tue Nov 30, 9:29 PM ET U.S. National - AP http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041201/ap_on_re_us/military_recruiters_harvard
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - Harvard Law School will return to a policy that keeps the military from recruiting on campus in the wake of a federal court decision allowing colleges and universities to bar recruiters without fear of losing federal money.
Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan said the decision, effective Tuesday, will allow the school to enforce its nondiscrimination policy without exception, "including to the military services."
Harvard had forbidden any recruiter from campus — military or otherwise — that couldn't sign off on the school's nondiscrimination policy. Harvard, like other schools, said the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy was discriminatory, because it forbids overt gays and lesbians from serving in the armed forces.
In 2002, the Pentagon (news - web sites) told Harvard and other schools that the government would begin enforcing a law, called the Solomon Amendment, which permits the Defense Department to deny funds to colleges and universities that restrict military recruiting or ROTC on campus.
Harvard and other schools backed off their bans and allowed military recruiters on campus. A coalition of about two dozen law schools sued the government in 2003.
On Monday, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (news - web sites) struck down the Solomon Amendment, saying it infringed on the free speech rights of law schools. The 2-1 vote overturned an earlier decision from a judge that the lawsuit was unlikely to succeed. Harvard was not a party to the suit.