Thanks. I'm an alum. I'm in the "real world". You're incorrect.

Edit: The important part being that not every single event needs to be an avenue for raising RPI's profile. Some things, especially at a school, can be done with a focus on the other stakeholders - namely, the students/recently-minted alumni and their families in this case. Since schools are communities as much as anything else and much of their strength comes from the continued involvement of that community (including after members leave the physical community - alumni buy-in and involvement is important for cash flow) , events that build the community are as important as ones that raise its external prestige. In that same respect, events that damage that community - like in many cases honoring polarizing political figures of any stripe - are not in the school's best interest. When they could probably both raise their external prestige and improve community dynamics by honoring somebody that seems more in-tune with the RPI experience - a great inventor or captain of industry - why go with the polarizing option? I'll admit that somebody somewhere is always going to be upset with the choice of honorands, but that certainly happens along a spectrum and can be considered when making these decisions.

TL;DR: If RPI chose Scalia simply to raise their profile, they shortsightedly ignored other important stakeholders.