ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, September 12, 1996 TAG: 9609130055
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-10 EDITION: METRO
FIRST, Justice Department lawyers told the folks at Virginia Military Institute they had to get permission to talk coeducation with the U.S. service academies. Now, the lawyers want the courts to order VMI to send out admission applications to women posthaste - which the institute, unless it opts to go private to stay all-male, plans to do anyway within the next couple of weeks.
Why the hectoring? At best, it is premature paper-pushing of a kind that gives government bureaucracy and zealous regulation a bad name. It could even hinder attempts to comply with the Supreme Court's decision that VMI, as a state institution, cannot exclude women from the unique educational opportunities it has long afforded young men.
The high court, Justice lawyers should remember, left open the possibility that a private, all-male VMI might be constitutionally valid.
The court's ruling also retained a distinction between discrimination against women and discrimination against racial minorities, the latter showing more obvious evidence of malicious motive and presumably requiring more urgent remedies.
And the court did not accuse the institute, or the commonwealth, of bad faith in resisting coeducation at VMI pending a definitive ruling.
In short, this wasn't massive resistance redux. Nor, contrary to the impression that the Justice lawyers apparently would like to leave, has it become so since the ruling.
VMI officials appear to have worked diligently to help ensure that coeducation will be implemented fully and thoughtfully in the event VMI is to remain public. This is an obvious reason to consult with the service academies, and to take a bit of time to establish training programs for those who'll interview women applicants.
The military institute has a bad habit of going behind closed doors to discuss the go-private option. But that's not sufficient reason to assume the Board of Visitors is contemplating some sort of sweetheart deal with the state that would invite additional litigation. In any event, everyone - including the Justice Department - will know VMI's plans soon enough. Why fret about them before Sept. 21, the board's scheduled decision date?
In the VMI ruling, the high court encouragingly reaffirmed the constitutional principle, enshrined in the 14th Amendment, that no American can be denied equal protection of the laws. Against that, Justice's attitude seems petty, and in its pettiness threatens to undermine the moral authority that the ruling deserves.
LENGTH: Short : 49 linesby CNB