The Ivy Leagues vs. Supreme Court

Stanford and several other Ivy League universities continue to disregard the Supreme Court ruling of March 2006, which states they must either allow ROTC and military recruiters on campus or lose federal funding. 

Stanford argues they must refuse to allow ROTC on campus because the military is discriminating against homosexual individuals.  This stalemate came to a head in 1996 when Congress passed the Solomon Amendment, allowing the Secretary of Defense to deny federal funding to institutions of higher learning if they prevent ROTC or military recruitment on campus. 

The Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, FAIR,  an association of 36 law schools and law faculties, challenged the amendment in the Third Circuit Court.  The Third Circuit ruled that the Solomon Amendment was unconstitutional under the First Amendment.  But, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Third Circuit, unanimously upholding the constitutionality of the Solomon Amendment.  Despite this, Stanford and other elite universities continue to refuse to allow ROTC on campus; but have no moral difficulty accepting federal money.

Stanford claims it must “maintain the highest academic standards for its degrees” and ROTC classes do not meet those quality standards. Interestingly, classes such as “Badminton, Beginning and Intermediate” do meet the “highest academic standards” demanded by Stanford, while “The Evolution of U.S. Air and Space Power” does not.

Stanford is one of those elite universities most of us did not have the money to attend.  It is one of those that believe they have the best and brightest.  But who is discriminating, the military or Stanford?  The military is not about expanding your horizons, exploring diversity, and challenging the status quo.  The military is about war, and war demands dramatically different rules and regulations.  The military’s mission requires many regulations I believe would be considered discriminatory in a civilian setting.  But, in the setting of the armed forces they are reasonable and needed. 

It is not the military that is discriminatory; it is Stanford University that is discriminatory.  Stanford claims diversity but only allows the diversity that supports its agenda.  Lt. Col. Randolph C. White Jr. describes these elite university leaders as “having great sounding titles and published articles and ready with advice but never ready to pick up a rifle, ruck up, and close with the enemy.”

Do not look to Stanford, Yale, Harvard, Columbia or Brown for lessons on principle, character, and national loyalty.  Since the Vietnam War they have maintained an ongoing list of ever-changing excuses to keep ROTC off their campuses.

If you want to see genuine character and principles look to the handful of Stanford students who commute to other universities for ROTC training.  These few endure hardship and discrimination, while maintaining their commitment to their ROTC training.  It is not Stanford, but the ROTC students who have maintained the “highest standards.”

The ROTC students understand what Lt. Col. White meant when he said “the moral clarity of the United States soldier will not allow them to sit back, allowing someone else to provide the blanket of freedom we cherish.”

Perhaps ending the draft some 30 years ago and going to an all volunteer army was an error.  By ending the draft have we allowed a class of individuals to develop who feel no obligation or duty to their country?  Have we allowed a class of individuals to develop who believe they are superior to the rest of us?  With 70 percent of the officers in the armed forces coming from university ROTC programs, shouldn’t we expect the elites to do their share as long as they are accepting federal money?

If these universities genuinely believe the military is discriminatory would it not be to their advantage to contribute well educated officers to the military who would then be in a position to create change?

The ROTC students Stanford treats so poorly joined the military during a time of war knowing full well the ramifications of their decision.  These students should be honored for their loyalty and courage, while Stanford should be humbled and embarrassed.  Lt. Col. White suggests that Stanford-like elitists “will always exist on the periphery of any endeavor that requires selfless service or loyalty. They are not worthy of concern.  And in the pit of their stomach they wish they could be like the American soldier.  The intestinal fortitude that is a part of the soldier’s fabric is something they covet but will never know.”

The Supreme Court ruled.  The legal challenges are over.  Ask our senators and representatives to demand adherence to law, ending any and all federal money for those institutions that do not comply.  Now that I think about it, I’m glad I didn’t have the money to attend a “Stanford.”

You can view the entire speech of Lt. Col. Randolph C. White Jr. at:

https://www.infantry.army.mil/videos/video22/index.htm

Print Page