From where we sit, the only reason some people are "up in arms" over the military recruiting on college campuses is they fear some students might actually like what they hear and join. Of course, the reason du jour for keeping recruiters away from students is the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy toward gays. But that's today. Tomorrow, another objection will surface. Somehow, in their self-serving minds, the fact that the military trains people to kill other people doesn't trigger much concern among the politically correct crowd.

Fortunately, if this week's hearing is any indication, the U.S. Supreme Court appears ready to strike down any rule that would keep military recruiters at bay. If Socialists, Fascists, Anarchists and the Flat Earth Society can recruit freely on campuses, somehow letting the Marines have their say doesn't seem a major concern. But then modern universities — supposedly formed to further Jefferson's notion of the "free play of ideas" — can be as skittish as a meeting of the Shy Rights Commission.

The justices nailed down several points in their opinions against banning recruiters. Justice Stephen Breyer commented that many people disagree with government policies, but they are not allowed to stop paying taxes. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said the arguments against recruiters would mean anyone in a uniform would not be welcome, at times, to eat in the school cafeteria.

In the end, those in upper education who try to limit access to young minds fall into a time-honored fallacy. They believe a university exists to broaden the scope of learning. They trust the truth. They simply don't trust young people to think for themselves and make choices. Perhaps that attitude is fostered by the "master and disciple" syndrome at most schools. But that is not only patronizing, it is a recipe for undermining the very reason universities exist at all: to allow for free inquiry.

The "ban the recruiters" crowd members have become insulated in their ivory towers. They are elitist critics who feel only those in the know (i.e. themselves) deserve to voice opinions. Nobody else has enough information to make meaningful choices. If they are allowed to monitor and manipulate open discussions, the American university would quickly degenerate into a "Bay of Prigs."

We hope the U.S. Supreme Court has seen through the smoke screen and is not about to let that happen.