Experts debate Solomon Amendment at USC Law forum

Two leading legal experts debated the Solomon Amendment in a special educational forum April 11 at USC Law.

Sponsored by the Gay and Lesbian Law Union and the Federalist Society, Martin Meekins and John Eastman presented separate views on the Solomon Amendment, legislation that requires law schools to provide full access to military recruiters or lose all federal funding for their universities.

At the forum, which drew nearly 100 students, Meekins and Eastman gave their opposing views on the Solomon Amendment — Eastman favors it, while Meekins opposes it.

Meekins, an associate in the law firm White & Case in Los Angeles and a respected authority on the First Amendment, believes the Solomon Amendment is not constitutional and hinders most law schools’ nondiscrimination policies.

Eastman, who clerked for U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and is another authority on the First Amendment, believes the Solomon Amendment is constitutional as well as legal. He said it comes down to a simple federal spending issue.

Meekins and Eastman did agree on one matter — the issue likely will be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court in the coming months.

In the past year, several district courts have weighed in on the issue.

USC Law has allowed military recruiters at its career fairs since 2002, when the Department of Defense found the school to be out of compliance with federal regulations that require law schools to facilitate military recruiting or risk the loss of all federal funding to parent universities.

Before that time, USC Law did not permit military recruiters at career fairs because military recruiters were unable to certify that their hiring practices were consistent with USC Law’s nondiscrimination policy. USC Law’s nondiscrimination policy states that the school’s career services facilities are open to employers who do not discriminate on the basis of ethnicity, national origin, disability, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation or age.