CAMPUS REACTS
Before making her policy reversal public yesterday, Kagan attended a meeting last night of the Law School’s gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender student group, Lambda, to explain her decision.
Lambda President Jeffrey G. Paik ’03 released a statement last night calling the Department of Defense’s enforcement of the Solomon Amendment “reprehensible” but applauding Kagan for “the courageous action she took last November.”
Lambda’s treasurer, Adam R. Sorkin, echoed those sentiments.
“Many in the group think this really makes us feel like second-class citizens,” said. “If we were a [racial or ethnic] minority, this wouldn’t be the policy of the school.”
Military recruiters are scheduled to appear on the Law School campus on October 6 and October 12, Sorkin said, and he added, “We’re not just going to sit back and take it.”
At noon today, Minow and Loeb University Professor Laurence H. Tribe ’62 are slated to unveil their friend-of-the-court brief at a press conference on the steps of Langdell Library.
In an e-mail to The Crimson yesterday, Tribe wrote that the brief is being filed on the professors’ behalf by the former acting solicitor general during the Clinton administration, Walter E. Dellinger III.
FAIR President Kent Greenfield, a Boston College law professor who is leading the opposition to the Solomon Amendment, said that in addition to the Harvard brief, five to seven other groups will also file friend-of-the-court briefs on FAIR’s behalf today.
COURT-WATCHING
The new developments come less than a week after President Bush’s nominee for Supreme Court chief justice, John G. Roberts, Jr. ’76, said during his confirmation hearings that “as a general proposition,” he believes that Congress may attach certain conditions to the receipt of federal funds. The Solomon Amendment only applies to schools that receive federal grants.
Roberts’ statement came in response to a question from Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, an outspoken supporter of the Solomon Amendment.
Roberts cited the high court’s 7-2 decision in South Dakota v. Dole, which held that Congress could require states that receive federal highway funds to adopt a 21-year-old minimum drinking age.
Greenfield said that Roberts’ statement during the confirmation hearings did not mean that the nominee would necessarily vote against FAIR.
“This is a First Amendment case, and South Dakota v. Dole doesn’t control this because that wasn’t a First Amendment case. All the First Amendment precedents are firmly on our side,” Greenfield said.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the case on December 6 and will likely release its opinion sometime next year.
—Staff writer Daniel J. Hemel can be reached at hemel@fas.harvard.edu.
—Staff writer Javier C. Hernandez can be reached at jhernand@fas.harvard.edu.