Just have moronic federal judges overstep their constitutional bounds. The US military can no longer recruit on college campuses because "they discriminate against gays". The "reasonable man" standard (I'm not a lawyer and I can have any standard I want), would assume that there is no unreasonable burden placed on the schools to host recruiters. In addition, as Americans, it would be the least they could do to help the war effort.
Judge Ruggero Aldisert, in his dissent, pummels the majority -
I would hold that Congress’ use of the spending power and fulfillment of the requirements to maintain the military under Articles I and II do not unreasonably burden speech and, therefore, do not offend the First Amendment. I apply the balance-of-interests test and decide that the interest of protecting the national security of the United States outweighs the indirect and attenuated interest in the law schools’ speech, expressive association and academic freedom rights.
Seems reasonable to me. The continued, willful, mealy-mouthed, legal contortions these guys go through to get to their social-engineered outcomes is breathtaking. The suckerfish of the values voter were hyperlegal judges on a secular crusade.
Comments