The Rockford Institute’s SummerrnSchool provides an opportunity for informalrnprofessional development, intellectualrnchallenge, lively conversation, andrnthe cultivation of relationships with likemindedrnpeople.rnThank you so much for all of the effortrnyou put into it, and for your warm hospitalit)’.rn—Lisa MorganrnRedford, MlrnOn Praise and Blamern].(). Tate’s jovial critique of Hollywoodrngender-benders (“Unisex Multiplex,”rnViews, February) provides a great overviewrnof the problems with ostensibly innocuousrnentertainment. As an admirerrnof the Cocn brothers’ films, I would onlyrnadd to Professor Tate’s discussion of ThernBig Ixihowski that the film, in addition tornbeing a wicked parody of RaymondrnChandler, also mordantly depicts nihilismrnthrough the Germanic trio thatrnharasses “The Dude” (Jeff Bridges), hirnone of the more hilarious scenes in recentrnyears, one of the nihilists bleats, “Lssrnnot fair!” To which John Goodman’srncharacter retorts, “Fair? Wlio’s the f—ingrnnihilist around here!” Strike a blowrnagainst sanctimony!rnThat said, Professor Tate’s essay containsrnone minor error: Tyne Daly wasrnHarry Callahan’s partner in The Enforcer,rnnot Sudden Impact, hieidentally, Dirtv’rnHarrv’ makes a comment in The Enforcerrnthat complements Professor Tate’s essay.rnWhen one of the mayor’s stuffy feministrnstaff informs Callahan that “His Honorrnintends to broaden the areas of participahonrnfor women in the police force,” thernirreverent inspector observes, “Well, thatrnsounds very stylish” —a perfect assessmentrnand dismissal of the radical chic sornintertwined with feminism.rn—MylesKantorrnBoynton Beach, El.rnWhile I enjoy Chronicles, I was a bit surprisedrnto see Siobhan MeKenna’s namernmentioned along with “Hillary and Rosiernand Madonna and Riot Grrrls . . .” inrnyour Februar)’ issue (“It’s a Girl’s, Girl’s,rnGirl’s, Girl’s World,” Views).rnThe late Siobhan MeKenna was thernfirst lady of Irish theater. Her film creditsrninclude Dr. Zhivago and King of Kings. Irnhad the pleasure of seeing her on stage inrnSan Francisco a few years before sherndied. She certainly had little in commonrnwith the other women on the list.rnIs it possible that Marian KesterrnCoombs was thinking of Sinead O’Connorrnand simply got her Irish lasses confused?rnI trust that this was an honest mistakernwhich your fact-checker simplyrnfailed to catch.rn— Siobhan SemmettrnDayton, OHrnThe Editors Reply:rnWlien it rains, it pours. We regret the errorsrnand thank our readers for callingrnthem to onr attenfion.rnCULTURAL REVOLUTIONSrnTHE U.S. SUPREME COURT, manyrnhad hoped, would use this term to clarifyrnconstitutional law and move jurisprudencernsomewhat closer to the originalrnunderstanding of the Consfitufion. ThernCourt has yet to issue important opinionsrnregarding school vouchers, partial-birthrnabortion, the Violence Against WomenrnAct, and prayer at high school footballrngames, but the latest First Amendmentrndecision to be released has sent an alarmingrnsignal.rnIt’s mv duty as Chronicles’ legal affairsrneditor to interpret the Court’s decisionsrnfor you, and part of that job is to predictrnhow the Court will rule. In an earlier article,rnI indicated that the Supremesrnwould probabK’ nix the University of Wisconsin’srnpolicy of using mandatory studentrnfees to subsidize ideological .speech,rnbut I’ve been proved wrong—and bv arnnine to zero vote, no less. I’m not alone,rnhowever. The Wisconsin Federal Di.strictrnCourt judge who first heard the caserngot it wrong, too, as did the three judgesrnon the panel of the U.S. Court of Appealsrnfor the Seventh Circuit. All opined thatrnmandator)’ student fees of this type werern”coerced speech” and therefore impermissiblernunder the First Amendment.rnPrevious Supreme Comt decisionsrnhad held that non-union teachers couldrnnot be compelled to pay “service fees”rnthat teachers’ unions use to fund politicalrnactivities, and that lawyers who are compelledrnto join state bar associations couldrnprevent their dues from being used tornfund such activities. In both cases, thernComt ruled that the political activitiesrnwere not “germane” to the purpose of thernorganization in question (collective bargaining,rnin the case of teachers’ unions;rn”regulating the legal profession and improvingrnthe quality of legal services,” inrnthe ease of bar associations).rnThe Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals,rnfollowing these precedents, observedrnthat the mandatory fee programrnfunded such student organizations as thernWisconsin Student Public Interest ResearchrnGroup; the Lesbian, C^ay, BisexualrnCampus Center; the UW Greens; thernMadison Aids Support Network; tiie InternationalrnSocialist Organization; andrnthe Ten Percent Society’. These groups,rnthe Seventh Circuit noted, lobbied Congressrnand Hie Wisconsin legislature, developedrnvoter guides, supported bills tornlimit mining in Wisconsin, promotedrnRalph Nader’s Green Party candidacy forrnpresident, and even advocated the overthrowrnof the “capitalist .system.” The SeventiirnCircuit concluded, “germanenessrncannot be read so broadly as to includernforced funding of private political andrnideological groups.”rnThus the district and appellate courtsrnupheld the challenge brought by conservativernstudents who objected to being requiredrnto underwrite ideological positionsrnwith which they disagreed. Perhapsrnthe courts thought that it is the job of arnimiversity to educate students, not tornforce them to make contributions to ideologicalrncauses. Given precedent andrnthe dubious nature and educational valuernof the compelled “speech” at issue, Irnpredicted that the highest court in thernland would concur. But no.rnSaid Mr. Justice Kennedy, writing forrnthe Supreme Court, “To insist upon askingrnwhat speech is germane would berncontrary to the very goal the Lhiiversitv’rn.seeks to pursue. It is not for the Court tornsay what is or is not gennanc to tiie ideasrnto be pursued in an institution of higherrnlearning.” Elaborating, Ju.sfice Kennedyrnindicated that “I’he University may determinernthat its mission is well served ifrnshidents have tiie means to engage in dynamicrndiscu.ssions of philosophical, religious,rnscientific, social, and political subjectsrnin their extracurricular campus lifernlUNE 2000/5rnrnrn