They post a dry erase board of their benefits in a window, then patiently wait inside for a Kirkwood Ave. passerby to walk in and give them some active duty. \nWith coordinates due east, the Indiana National Guard recruitment office is not technically based on campus grounds, but its mere nearby presence has been enough to warrant occasional student protesters in front of its doors since its recent installment. \nWhile some picketers come to issue their disapproval with the war in Iraq, others dissent because they object to the military seeking its new recruits from a pool of college students. National Guard recruiters, along with other military branches of recruiters, can be spotted venturing onto campus, soliciting for their organizations.\nOn the national level, some of these protesters against campus recruitment are challenging actual law. A lower-court ruling in Philadelphia recently ruled that law schools have the First Amendment to support their desire to restrict recruiters whose hiring practices discriminate. \nBecause the military touts the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which prevents gay men and women from disclosing their sexual orientation while in the service, a district judge overturned the Solomon Amendment, which tolerates the government's will to withhold funding from universities that ban or refuse to assist military recruitment. This month, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would review the appeal's court decision.
Free Speech v. Free Speech\nA union of 30 law schools, calling themselves the Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, collaborated to challenge the Solomon Amendment because it believes the law compels it to support a discrimination message it does not condone. \n"The argument is that (schools) should be permitted to enforce anti-rules for employers," said IU law professor Daniel Conkle, who specializes in the First Amendment. "The idea is that by helping recruiters, (they believe) they are symbolically associating (themselves) with 'don't ask, don't tell.'" \nConkle explains that recruiters benefit from the University because they oftentimes use Career Services to schedule interviews and use campus venues to set up information booths and advertisements. Through this cooperation, FAIR argues that allowing recruiters access to the whims of its employers would be contradictory of its diversity, equal opportunity employment and anti-discrimination policies. \n"Both sides have existing Supreme Court precedence for a First Amendment argument," Conkle said. \nHe refers to the Boy Scouts of America v. Dale case, in which the court ruled that the organization had a First Amendment right to refuse to employ openly gay individuals as Boy Scout leaders. \n"(Boy Scouts of America) was saying, 'We don't want to be associated with a pro-gay rights message,'" Conkle said. Conkle suggested that FAIR will actually use this case which ruled in favor of the Boy Scout's as precedence for its own case. The concept is that if one group can say it is freedom of speech not to want to be associated with a pro-gay rights message, another should be free to say it does not want to be associated with an anti-gay rights message.
Is IU on Guard? \nAs Conkle describes it, this case is a sensitive issue to the law schools opposed to it because the federal funding factor creates "a very conditional thing."\n"You have a situation here where the government has been saying, 'you want our money, you have to permit our military recruiters access to resources,'" Conkle said. \nAlthough the funding subject to the Solomon Amendment goes to the larger university, law schools have been at the forefront of this debate because military branches seek law students more than students of any other collegiate field. There is a high demand for lawyers to handle military legal affairs through the Judge Advocate General's Corps. \nAt IU, the attitude toward recruitment has always been accommodating. \nDean of Students Richard McKaig says he is not aware of any dissent among the IU law school ranks. \n"We've had (military recruiters) all along, working directly with the Career Services offices," McKaig said. "For us, it's never been restrictive." \nWhen asked if the University felt that assisting the military while it has the "don't ask, don't tell" policy was in any way contradictory of its own anti-discrimination policies, McKaig claimed, "No, that hasn't been our posture." \nYet there are IU staff and students who would disagree, asserting that the interaction is in fact hypocritical of the diversity message.
Message Fall-out\nDoug Bauder, Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender Student Support Services office coordinator, is one of those dissenters.\n"I think it's inconsistent with the University policy," Bauder said. "In some sense, the military does some good work that has probably benefited (some of the GLBT community) because it offers some educational benefits for people with lower-income backgrounds. But I'm conflicted about it because many of those who benefited had to be very closeted. So although the military may be helping them economically, that can't serve them mentally, spiritually, psychologically or emotionally." \nBauder compares military recruitment to the history the GLBT community has had with the Red Cross. \n"When the Red Cross would come on campus to do blood drives, they would automatically reject men who wanted to donate if they acknowledged on their questionnaire that they had ever engaged in sex with another man," Bauder explained. "And they would do this without even asking if they were currently sexually active, if they had been tested or used protection."\n"We wanted to work with the Red Cross about their discriminatory policy because we recognize that they do some good work. It's a Catch-22, and I would say the same is true with military recruiters," Bauder said. \nSenior Matt Brunner, who was visiting the GLBTSSS office at the time of Bauder's interview, commented: "For campuses to allow (military recruiters) to come through is often counter-productive because they claim to promote diversity. I think schools should be able to shun the recruiters if they disagree with their policies."
In the Military's Defense\nAt the Indiana National Guard's Kirkwood location, Specialist Joe Bennett promptly raised to his feet at the sight of someone entering the office. In his camouflage fatigues and combat boots, Bennett stood with a sturdy stance -- legs apart, hands clasped behind his back -- when asked to comment on the case. \n"I can understand why people would be upset about the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy," Bennett said. "But it's hard to change those views (of the military) ... Even though it might offend some people, I think it was originally supposed to protect. Nobody knows, so nobody can do anything to hurt you."\nBut Bennett said it was a shame when recruiters were barred from campuses because "that stops a lot people from learning about the military." \n"And that's bad news for us because we'd lose a lot of people coming in," he said. "... And bad because less people get to hear about our benefits." \n"I definitely think it's our free speech," Bennett said. "You're not going to stop a church on a campus because you don't believe in its religion." \nBennett said most of his work is through the University ROTC program, but he said he often walks around campus.\n"I think the (Solomon Amendment) kind of makes sense," he said. "I mean, how can they say, 'we'll take your money, but you're not allowed anywhere near us?" \n-- Contact Staff Writer Elisha Sauers at esauers@indiana.edu.
