K Graham wrote: ↑
Thu May 05, 2022 3:42 am
doubtingthomas wrote: ↑
Thu May 05, 2022 2:51 am
If Roe doesn't get overturned, then the midterms will be a disaster for Democrats.
And relying on precedents is bad philosophy in my view.
Seriously? Precedents are bad huh. Even when establishing rights? When has Supreme Court ever ruled to take away anyone's rights before?
Well, they're working on something for the Selective Service System it seems and have been for quite some time. I'm not following this carefully. I thought of the Selective Service System and did a little searching is all. I think the history is there that might satisfy your question since it looks like the Supreme Court has been ruling on tweaking the original Act.
https://www.aclu.org/cases/national-coa ... stem-et-al
Update: on June 7, 2021, the Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari. In denying the petition, Justice Sotomayor issued a brief statement, joined by Justices Breyer and Kavanaugh, acknowledging that "the role of women has changed dramatically" since Rostker was decided, but explaining that it was declining to review the case in order to allow Congress more time to consider the report recently issued by the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service recommending that the registration requirement be extended regardless of sex.
ETA: Huh. This is in the wiki.
The Selective Service System is authorized by the Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution which says Congress "shall have Power To ... provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union;" The Selective Service Act is the law which established the Selective Service System under these provisions.
The act has been challenged in light of the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution which prohibits "involuntary servitude". These challenges, however, have not been supported by the courts; as the Supreme Court stated in Butler v. Perry (1916):
The amendment was adopted with reference to conditions existing since the foundation of our government, and the term 'involuntary servitude' was intended to cover those forms of compulsory labor akin to African slavery which, in practical operation, would tend to produce like undesirable results. It introduced no novel doctrine with respect of services always treated as exceptional, and certainly was not intended to interdict enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the state, such as services in the army, militia, on the jury, etc.
During the First World War, the Supreme Court ruled in Arver v. United States (1918), also known as the Selective Draft Law Cases, that the draft did not violate the Constitution.
Later, during the Vietnam War, a federal appellate court also concluded that the draft was constitutional in Holmes v. United States (1968).
Since the reinstatement of draft registration in 1980, the Supreme Court has heard and decided four cases related to the Military Selective Service Act: Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57 (1981), upholding the constitutionality of requiring men but not women to register for the draft; Selective Service v. Minnesota Public Interest Research Group (MPIRG), 468 U.S. 841 (1984), upholding the constitutionality of the "Solomon Amendment", which requires applicants for Federal student aid to certify that they have complied with draft registration, either by having registered or by not being required to register; Wayte v. United States, 470 U.S. 598 (1985), upholding the policies and procedures which the Supreme Court thought the government had used to select the "most vocal" non-registrants for prosecution, after the government refused to comply with discovery orders by the trial court to produce documents and witnesses related to the selection of non-registrants for prosecution; and Elgin v. Department of Treasury, 567 U.S. 1 (2012), regarding procedures for judicial review of denial of federal employment for non-registrants.
The case National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System resulted in the male-only draft registration being declared unconstitutional by a district court. That decision was reversed by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. A petition for review was then filed with the U.S. Supreme Court.