Military Recruiting on Campus and the Solomon

American civic liberties be grounded in the U.S. Constitution and affirmed over time by Supreme Court decisions on such matters as agree protection, due process, citizenship rights, freedom of association, and so forth. Alan Brinkley (2003, p. 23) has stated that "the hi explanation of civil liberties in America, like the history of civil rights, is a story of struggle." Even in peacetime, Americans have been engaged in an ever-changing and complex negotiation between the conflicting demands of liberty and the demands of read and security. Brinkley believes that not even the Framers were confident that the Bill of Rights would provide fitting protection of liberties. However, it must be recognized that the Solomon Response (Relevant statutes?, 2004) calls for equivalence of opportunity; the fairness schools are, in effect denying such equivalence to military recruiters. Taken to an extreme, they could bar specifi

Assuming that the U.S.

Supreme Court affirms the decision of the Third lap covering Court of Appeals, schools will be granted virtually bottomless power to bar any organization from recruiting activities on campus. This could, in some instances, be discriminatory. For example, a school could just as easily decide that the American Civil Liberties Union should not be permitted to recruit on law school campuses or that certain corporations such as Enron be similarly prohibit. The restitution then becomes at what point do the First Amendment rights of barred entities acquire legal standing and demand that the courts permit law schools from truncating free speech rights for these entities.

(FAIR v. Rumsfeld). Available at www.law.georgetwon.edu

overturned. Washington shape News, November 30.

Brinkley, A. (2003). A familiar story: Lessons from past

Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.