NY Times Reviews Solomon and Notes Unique Stand of Mason Law Faculty
In an article on the the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in favor of military recruiters in the Solomon case (Rumsfeld v. FAIR), The New York Times discusses how hundreds of faculty from the most prestigious law schools ended up on the losing side. The dean and two professors from George Mason School of Law were the only law faculty in the country to file an amicus brief in support of the military.
Supreme Court Smackdown! The New York Times, March 12, 2006.— by Adam Liptak.
Peter H. Schuck, a Yale law professor who thought the law schools' legal position was misguided, said that many professors were so indignant about the military's treatment of gay men and women and so scornful of the military itself that their judgment became clouded.
"There is often a feeling that if something is morally wrong it must be legally wrong and that clever arguments can bring those two things into alignment," Professor Schuck said.
The elite law schools have for decades been overwhelmingly liberal, Professor Schuck said, and that may have blinded professors to problems with their arguments. Only one law school brief, organized by members of the faculty of George Mason University School of Law, supported the military.
"If you put together a Vietnam legacy, a gay rights ideology, the idea that courts can solve all problems and the legal academy's echo chamber, you get this result, " said Joseph Zengerle, an adjunct professor at George Mason who helped write the brief.