If the gov't conditioned money on ND accepting Pro Choice recruiters, that's perfectly legal. It would be like if Notre Dame tried to ban gov't recruiters during the pro choice Clinton yrs but still demanded they get gov't money. No one would buy that.

Again, imagine this is 1944 and Harvard refuses recruiters because the military enforces segregation. But they still want the money so they go to the SCOTUS. What do you think the decision would be? My guess? 7-2 for the gov't.(maybe Murphy and Jackson dissent)

You still haven't addressed that even if the DADT thing were resolved, FAIR would concoct untold other reasons to oppose the military. That's what this is about, not DADT. We both agree on the constitutionality of the case. We just disagree on the policy/wisdom of it. But it's not the SC's job to decide cases based on policy. It IS theirt job to decide them based on the Constitution. My suggestion to you is to stop worrying about this case and to start worrying about electing Hillary or Mark Warner in 2008 and taking back the Congress. Then you can get DADT repealed and change the miltary's gay policy.