This is the line that slays me:
"And Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who is retiring, said colleges can post disclaimers on campus noting their objections to military policy."
WTF does that have to do with the CONSTITUTIONAL issue here? That the schools have other methods for making their opinions known is irrelevant to the question of whether it is permissible for the federal government to give money or loans with strings attached. That the federal government has a right to put strings on its expenditures is precedentially supported going back more than a century, maybe more than two. She is such a dumb...oh, what's the word...bunt...hunt...runt...geez, I can't recall, but she is a complete affirmative action hire.
"WTF does that have to do with the CONSTITUTIONAL issue here?"
She was just giving them an example of how their free speech was clearly not being restrained.
Actually, it goes to the heart of the "1st Amendment" claim of the universities. O'Connor's statement shows that the univeristy has options available to it (citing one particular example) that don't require banning recruiters outright, therefore there is no compelling reason, even if the university's argument is accepted, to overturn the law.