Roberts' Brilliance

John Roberts, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, proved why he deserves his position.

The man understands the law and can articulate his views persuasively and with clarity.

WASHINGTON, March 6 -- The Supreme Court on Monday upheld a law that cuts federal financing for universities if they do not give military recruiters the same access to students that other potential employers receive. The court ruled that the law does not violate the free-speech rights of universities that object to the military's exclusion of gay men and lesbians who are open about their sexual orientation.

The opinion by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. was unanimous.

It was a setback, although hardly an unexpected one, to a coalition of law schools that brought the constitutional challenge, as well as to the Association of American Law Schools, which represents nearly all accredited law schools and since 1991 has required adherence to a nondiscrimination policy on sexual orientation as a condition of membership.

Many law schools initially chose to comply with the association's policy by barring military recruiters or by taking such steps as refusing to help the recruiters schedule appointments or relegating them to less favorable locations for meeting with students.

Congress responded with a series of increasingly punitive measures, all known as the Solomon Amendment, culminating in the 2004 statute at issue in the case. It requires access for military recruiters "that is at least equal in quality and scope" to access for other employers, on pain of forfeiting grants to the entire university from eight federal agencies, including the Departments of Defense, Education, and Health and Human Services.

With hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, all but a handful of law schools yielded. Nearly three dozen banded together as the Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights and turned to the courts.

Carl C. Monk, executive director of the law school association, said in an interview on Monday that the group would continue to require its member schools to engage in "significant" activities to counter the impact of the Solomon Amendment, such as organizing faculty forums at which the military's policy could be analyzed and challenged.

The plaintiffs had persuaded the federal appeals court in Philadelphia that the Solomon Amendment imposed an "unconstitutional condition" on the universities' receipt of federal money by requiring them to surrender their First Amendment rights and become involuntary carriers of the government's anti-gay message.

But Chief Justice Roberts said on Monday that the plaintiffs' theory of the case, as well as the opinion by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, was based on a fundamental misperception about what the Solomon Amendment was imposing.

"As a general matter, the Solomon Amendment regulates conduct, not speech," the chief justice said. "It affects what law schools must do — afford equal access to military recruiters — not what they may or may not say."

Read more.

This guy is good.

He actually interprets the law and stays awake!

Very refreshing.

To the anti-military elite populating universities and sitting in positions of authority, this was a defeat. Not only was it a defeat, the decision against the anti-military brigade was unanimous. Even ultra-liberal Justice Ginsburg had to agree with Roberts.

It's a new day. I think that the Supreme Court is in good hands. I'm certain.

We can thank George W. Bush for nominating John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

Supreme Court nominations are the legacy that keep on giving.