• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Photo

Brad Schwan is a second-year law student who has served in the Army and believes military recruit

Brad Schwan was involved in active duty for the Army for six years before coming to UCLA for law school.

A second-year student at the UCLA School of Law and vice-chairman of the UCLAW Veterans Society, Schwan knew he always wanted the opportunity to go to law school, which was one of the reasons he joined the Army.

Schwan said he went “for a sense of duty and a college education, a combination of those two factors.”

Schwan and other law students are often faced with recruiters from different agencies, and among the most controversial are military recruiters.

A lawsuit involving the Solomon Amendment, which restricts funding to schools that do not allow military recruiters on campus, will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in its upcoming term, which begins in October.

This issue has caused conflict within law schools, because some say the military has discriminatory practices against sexual orientation and age, which violate the schools’ nondiscrimination policies.

UCLAW members argue that military recruiters should be allowed on campus, regardless of the disputes.

“The military needs good, smart people, and this would prevent the military from getting them on college campuses,” said Peter Bartle, chairman of the UCLAW Veterans Society.

Bartle also said other agencies have similar policies, but only the military is targeted.

“The military doesn’t make the rules, Congress does,” he said.

Bartle believes the federal funding issue is not the most important topic in the debate.

“This is not about the economic bottom line; people are dying in Iraq. They shouldn’t be playing games with people going into the military,” Bartle said.

Stereotypes against the forcefulness of military recruiters also prevails in many people’s views, but are not true, Schwan said.

“They are only there to make people aware. They are not cruising the halls trying to find people. They want people that are interested to come to them,” he said.

Maj. Michael Berry, who recruits students on campus, does not see a difference if a recruiter is looking for a service member or a Judge Advocate General, because the need for military service members is most important.

“To draw a distinction for recruitment is irrelevant. They have the same need for JAGs as for undergraduates to serve in other capacities in the Army; there is no difference,” Berry said.

“The ability to provide information to individuals who meet the requirements to serve in the capacity that is needed is the same,” he said.

Members of UCLAW stress the options a career as a military lawyer provide.

“They give you benefits you can’t find other places. The military is a great place to serve and be supported,” Bartle said.

The military only gets a small percentage of lawyers from within its service, which is why UCLAW members believe it is crucial for military recruiters to have access to law students.

“If you remove recruiting from law schools, where are you going to get people?” Schwan said. “They will eventually find candidates, but it is going to definitely diminish the quality of candidates available.”

“As far as the law goes, this is lightning speed,” Schwan said about how soon the decision could be made.

If the Supreme Court does not decide to overturn the Solomon Amendment, funding will still be withheld from schools that do not allow military recruiters on their campuses.