The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current, July 11, 1991, Summer, Page 4, Image 4
v - - „, . Opinion It’s about time Residency requirements should be raised Regent Don Blank’s push to heighten residency re quirements is long overdue. The requirements are too easy to meet. Out-of state students are coming to Nebraska for tuition rates that are cheaper than those in their own states, putting an undue burden on the university’s resources. “It is a sham,” Blank said. He is right on the money. Nebraska citizens pay taxes, and those taxes should go to support Nebraska students’ educations, not subsidize out-of-state students. All out-of-state students can prove residency merely by living in the state for six months and getting a few credentials, such as a driver’s license and checking account. These credentials are simply too easy to obtain. And an out-of-state student who has lived in the state for six months is simply not a resident. These students are com ing to the University of Nebraska-Lincoln for a cheap quality education and taking money from taxpayers. Nebraska students attending out-of-state universities don’t find the same benefits. UNL is already strapped for funds from the state. Liberal residency requirements exacerbate the situation. Upping the requirements might deter a few potential out-of-state students, who are valuable to a diverse uni versity atmosphere. But out-of-state students should be attracted by UNL’s quality, not its cheap tuition. Changing residency requirements would make the system more fair to Nebraskans and put their tax dollars to the use they were meant for — educating Nebraskans. — Victoria Ayoltc __ f0T it* Daily Nebraskan Trickle down Regents should examine hiring methods The gender equity committee established by the NU Board of Regents has made a strong start by calling for accountability from the top. Regent Charles Wilson of Lincoln, who leads the com mittee, at its latest meeting urged examining the hiring and promotion practices of administrators. Such performance reviews would be sure to pinpoint where the problems are and what is needed to solve them. The university, like every bureaucracy, is structured from the top down. To make significant change in a system that has women achieving far less salary and promotion levels than men must start where the decisions are made. Such a move might make administrators defensive, but it would be certain to make them look at their behavior. Such a review also would prompt those lower down to * examine their practices. This trickle down theory would be do more than pay lip service to gender equity. It would provoke results. — Victoria Ayotte for the Daily Nebraskan -EDITORIAL POLICY editorials represent me opinion oi the Summer Daily Nebraskan. The Daily Nebraskan’s publisher is the NU Board of Regents, which established the University of Nebraska Lincoln ruoiicauuiiJ* duoiu iu mi^ui vise the paper. According to the board policy, responsibility for the editorii content lies solely in the hands of th newspaper’s student editors. * Is I CHRIS POTTER Conservative court will assault precedents Wirnin a penoa oi one year me highest judicial authority in the United Slates has sharply curtailed the rights of the convicted, fully granted hitherto restricted pow ers to law enforcement authorities, muted discussion of the abortion al ternative in clinics, ruled that news organizations are not protected under the First Amendment when violating promises of confidentiality, and al lowed states to prohibit nude danc ing. This recent spate of Supreme Court decisions can only be described as the beginning of a massive conservative challenge to the body of progressive rulings built up by the Warren and Burger courts of the past 40 years. In the words of departing Justice Thur good Marshal], it is a prelude to “a far reaching assault upon this court’s precedents.” As a political institution, the court is the most authoritarian branch of a democratic government. Presidents may be voted out of office or im peached. Members of Congress, too, can be voted out. But justices of the Supreme Court are members for life once appointed by the president and confirmed by Congress. The only check on judicial power is the Constitution, which is notoriously subject to inter pretation and often simply docs not ftivak In f'vr'rv i«np nn'vnnif'H lv>fnn» the court. Largely isolated from checks on power, the court decides matters of paramount import. Both Brown vs. Board of Education, the landmark decision that forced desegregation in schools, and Roc vs. Wade, which struck down state laws that prohib ited abortion, attest to the court’s ability to adjudicate matters that strike at the heart of every one of our lives. But for all their importance, the court’s decisions go largely unno ticed. They do not captivate as presi dential wars and congressional scan dals do. Their legalistic phraseology - more often draws yawns than inter est, even when enlivened by the news * media. As a result, a massive change s in the legal framework of our nation 1‘ proceeds unhindered by public allcn e lion. After the reforming Warren Court The recent mate. q£ Supreme Court deci sions can only be de scribed as the begin nine of a massive con servative challenge... of the ’50s and ’60s initiated desegre gation, enhanced civil liberties, and disallowed school prayer, the pro gressive Burger Court of the ’70s upheld forced student busing to achieve racial integration, clamped restric tions on the death penally, and struck down laws forbidding abortion. But now the progressive majority of the court has flagged. Two of the last stalwarts of old guard progress, Jus tices Brennan and Marshall, recently have left the bench. Slocked wilh the appointees of Presidents Nixon, Re agan, and Bush, the court has edged closer to a conservative majority. Recent rulings confirm thisasscss mcnt. The most striking of these have been in the area of criminal law. Even while videotapes of police beatings in Los Angeles and Houston reveal what must be only a liny fraction of all police brutality, the court is extend ing even more power to law enforce ment authorities and steadily eroding civil liberties. In the case of Florida vs. Bostic, it ruled that law enforce ment officials may board buses and search luggage at random after ask ing permission. In Arizona vs. Fulmi nantc, it ruled that coerced confes sions do not automatically invalidate convictions. In County of Riverside vs. McLaughlin, it ruled that persons may be held in jail for as long as 48 nows w luiuui d tuui wan am. The Court’s criminal law rulings have been most striking, but perhaps equally ominous are its rulings on free speech. In Rust vs. Sullivan, it upheld with a slim 5-4 majority fed eral regulations that prohibit even the mention of abortion in family plan ning clinics that may receive federal funds. Not only does this clamp limits on a doctor’s free speech, it also in vades the hitherto sacred doctor-pa tient relationship. In Cohen vs. Cowles Media, the court ruled that news or ganizations are not protected by the First Amendment if they break prom ises of confidentiality to sources. Practically, this means that sources in places bf power may remain unnamed when revealing crucial information, which may be dubious in such a shroud of anonymity. In Barnes vs. Glen Theater, the court allowed states to prohibit nude dancing, an art form admittedly on the fringe of what rea sonably may be construed as free speech, but nonetheless close enough to make the ruling worrisome. The vacancy on the court left by Marshall is soon to be filled by a Bush nominee who will doubtless be con servative and inclined to join the recent a^.xiuiui un ^lu^ivooifv pivwviv.... Barring some scandal, Congress almost certainly will confirm Bush’s first nominee, Judge Clarence Thomas. Invariably described as a conserva tive, Thomas is a black man who rose from poverty and racial oppression to the highest echelons of the legal pro fession. The nation could doubtless expect highly judicious and humane decisions from Thomas, but his oppo sition to Affirmative Action may threaten recent strides made toward racial equity. With the new Bush appointee, the court’s composition will be fixed for a long period. A conservative altitude will quicken and reactionary majori ties will solidify as the conservative court continues to overturn the prece dents of the Warren and Burger courts. And Americans can only sit back and watch. Potter Is a senior physics, philosophy, math and history mqJor