National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System

Last updated

National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System
Seal of the Southern District of Texas.svg
Court United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Full case nameNational Coalition for Men, et al. v. Selective Service System, et al.
DecidedFebruary 22, 2019 (2019-02-22)
Docket nos. 4:16-cv-03362
DefendantSelective Service System; Donald Benton, as Director of Selective Service System
Counsel for plaintiff(s) Marc Angelucci
Plaintiff(s)National Coalition for Men; James Lesmeister, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Anthony Davis
Holding
Requiring only men to register for the draft violated their Fifth Amendment right.
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Gray H. Miller
Case opinions
Transcript
National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System
Seal of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.svg
Court United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Full case nameNational Coalition for Men, et al. v. Selective Service System, et al.
DecidedAugust 13, 2020
Docket nos.19-20272
Holding
The district court's judgment is reversed because it directly contradicts the Supreme Court’s holding in Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57, 78–79 (1981), and only the Supreme Court may revise its precedent.
Court membership
Judge(s) sitting Jacques L. Wiener Jr., Carl E. Stewart, and Don Willett
Case opinions
Opinion
Per curiam

National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System was a court case that was first decided in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas on February 22, 2019, declaring that requiring men but disallowing women to register for the draft for military service in the United States was unconstitutional. The ruling did not specify which actions the government needed to take to resolve the conflict with the constitution (e.g., whether to abolish the draft registration requirement or apply it in a gender-neutral manner). [1] That ruling was reversed by the Fifth Circuit.

Contents

In June 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the decision by the Court of Appeals. [2] In an opinion on supporting the denial, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Brett Kavanaugh, stated that while there was a constitutional argument about discrimination on sex on the current draft, they agreed to decline because Congress was actively evaluating removing the male-only requirement of the draft through the 2016 Commission, and that "the Court's longstanding deference to Congress on matters of national defense and military affairs cautions against granting review while Congress actively weighs the issue". [3]

Background

In the United States, men between the ages of 18 and 25 and residing in the country, with limited exceptions, are required to sign up and maintain their registration in the Selective Service System, established by the Military Selective Service Act. Failure to register or maintain that can lead to fines and prison, and prevents one from several government benefits such as federally backed student loans or employment in the federal sector. Women, who are not required to serve involuntarily, are not required to register. At the time it was established, the military did not allow women to serve in combat roles. The law was challenged on the basis of gender discrimination, leading to the Supreme Court case Rostker v. Goldberg . In that 1981 case, the Supreme Court ruled that the practice of requiring only men to register for the draft was constitutional on the basis that women were restricted from serving in combat roles.

Oral Argument before the 9th Circuit in the appeal of the initial dismissal of the case.

Between 2013 and 2015, the Pentagon abolished their restrictions on women voluntarily serving in combat roles. [1] Based on these changes, the National Coalition for Men, a non-profit men's rights organization, filed a lawsuit against the Selective Service System in the United States District Court for the Central District of California on April 4, 2013, arguing that with the Pentagon's change in female participation in combat roles, the rationale behind Rostker no longer applied, and the male-only requirement of the Selective Service System was gender-discriminatory. [4] In 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal of the case and remanded the case back to the district court. [5] The case was later moved to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas in the 5th Circuit. [6]

In 2016, through a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016, the Congress created the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service, an independent bipartisan advisory commission tasked with evaluating the Selective Service System and recommending whether women should be required to register with the Selective Service, or potentially do away with the Selective Service System to avoid the gender inequality issue. [7] [8] On January 23, 2019, the Commission released an interim report outlining the various options. [9] On March 25, 2020, after holding various public hearings, the Commission issued its final report, recommending that as long as the Selective Service System exists, both men and women should be subject to mandatory draft registration. [7] [8]

Arguments

The National Coalition for Men argued in part: "Forcing only males to register is an aspect of socially institutionalized male disposability and helps reinforce the stereotypes that support discrimination against men in other areas such as child custody, divorce, criminal sentencing, paternity fraud, education, public benefits, domestic violence services, due process rights, genital autonomy, and more." [10] Opponents of the status quo also argued that current conscription laws violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution via reverse incorporation because the law treats men and women differently.

Ruling

On February 22, 2019, Judge Gray H. Miller issued a declaratory judgement that the male-only registration requirement of the MSSA violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, [10] since the restrictions on women serving in combat roles in the military, which were present at the time of the decision in Rostker, no longer applied and men and women are, therefore, similarly situated for purposes of a draft or registration for a draft. [11] [12]

Appeal

The ruling was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. [13] The Eagle Forum filed an amicus curiae brief supporting continued registration of men for the draft, opposing requiring women to register, and asking the Court of Appeals to overturn the District Court decision. A coalition including the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Texas, American Civil Liberties Union, 9to5 National Association of Working Women, A Better Balance, Gender Justice, KWH Law Center for Social Justice and Change, National Organization for Women Foundation, National Women’s Law Center, Women’s Law Center of Maryland, and Women’s Law Project filed an amicus curiae brief arguing that the Court of Appeals should uphold the District Court finding that the current Military Selective Service Act is unconstitutional. [14] Oral arguments on the appeal were held March 3, 2020, before a 3-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals at Tulane Law School in New Orleans. [15] A decision by the panel was issued on August 13, 2020, reversing the District Court judgment on the grounds that it amounted to overturning the Supreme Court's precedent from Rostker, which only the Supreme Court has the authority to do. [16]

Supreme Court

Harry Crouch, President of the National Coalition for Men, announced that NCFM was "exploring its options, including filing a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the United States Supreme Court.". [17] On January 8, 2021, NCFM, represented by the ACLU and cooperating counsel from Hogan Lovells, filed a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the Supreme Court to review the decision of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. [18] The case was docketed in the Supreme Court as case No. 20-928. [19]

The Supreme Court declined to review the case in June 2021. [2] In an opinion on supporting the denial, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Brett Kavanaugh, stated that while there was a constitutional argument about discrimination on sex on the current draft, they agreed to decline because Congress was actively evaluating removing the male-only requirement of the draft through the 2016 Commission, and that "the Court's longstanding deference to Congress on matters of national defense and military affairs cautions against granting review while Congress actively weighs the issue". [3]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conscription</span> Compulsory enlistment into national or military service

Conscription is the state-mandated enlistment of people in a national service, mainly a military service. Conscription dates back to antiquity and it continues in some countries to the present day under various names. The modern system of near-universal national conscription for young men dates to the French Revolution in the 1790s, where it became the basis of a very large and powerful military. Most European nations later copied the system in peacetime, so that men at a certain age would serve 1–8 years on active duty and then transfer to the reserve force.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Selective Service System</span> American conscription system

The Selective Service System (SSS) is an independent agency of the United States government that maintains information on U.S. citizens and other U.S. residents potentially subject to military conscription and carries out contingency planning and preparations for two types of draft: a general draft based on registration lists of men aged 18–25, and a special-skills draft based on professional licensing lists of workers in specified health care occupations. In the event of either type of draft, the Selective Service System would send out induction notices, adjudicate claims for deferments or exemptions, and assign draftees classified as conscientious objectors to alternative service work. All male U.S. citizens and immigrant non-citizens who are between the ages of 18 and 25 are required by law to have registered within 30 days of their 18th birthdays, and must notify the Selective Service within ten days of any changes to any of the information they provided on their registration cards, such as a change of address. The Selective Service System is a contingency mechanism for the possibility that conscription becomes necessary.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conscription in the United States</span> History of mandatory military service in the United States

In the United States, military conscription, commonly known as the draft, has been employed by the U.S. federal government in six conflicts: the American Revolutionary War, the American Civil War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. The fourth incarnation of the draft came into being in 1940, through the Selective Training and Service Act. It was the country's first peacetime draft. From 1940 until 1973, during both peacetime and periods of conflict, men were drafted to fill vacancies in the U.S. Armed Forces that could not be filled through voluntary means. Active conscription in the United States ended in 1973, when the U.S. Armed Forces moved to an all-volunteer military. However, conscription remains in place on a contingency basis and all male U.S. citizens, regardless of where they live, and male immigrants, whether documented or undocumented, residing within the United States, who are 18 through 25 are required to register with the Selective Service System. United States federal law also continues to provide for the compulsory conscription of men between the ages of 17 and 44 who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, U.S. citizens, and certain women for militia service pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution and 10 U.S. Code § 246.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">James Andrew Wynn</span> American judge (born 1954)

James Andrew Wynn is an American jurist. He serves as a United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and formerly served on both the North Carolina Court of Appeals and the North Carolina Supreme Court.

United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court, ruling that a criminal prohibition against burning a draft card did not violate the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech. Though the court recognized that O'Brien's conduct was expressive as a protest against the Vietnam War, it considered the law justified by a significant government interest unrelated to the suppression of speech and was tailored towards that end.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Solomon Amendment</span>

The term Solomon Amendment has been applied to several provisions of U.S. law originally sponsored by U.S. Representative Gerald B. H. Solomon (R-NY).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Women in the United States judiciary</span>

The number of women in the United States judiciary has increased as more women have entered law school, but women still face significant barriers in pursuing legal careers.

The National Coalition for Men (NCFM), formerly the National Coalition of Free Men, is a non-profit educational and civil rights organization which aims to address the ways sex discrimination affects men and boys. The organization has sponsored conferences, adult education, demonstrations and lawsuits. NCFM is the United States' oldest generalist men's rights organization. It professes to being politically neutral, neither conservative nor liberal.

Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57 (1981), is a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States holding that the practice of requiring only men to register for the draft was constitutional. After extensive hearings, floor debate and committee sessions on the matter, the United States Congress reauthorized the law, as it had previously been, to apply to men only. Several attorneys, including Robert L. Goldberg, subsequently challenged the Act as gender distinction. In a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court upheld the Act, holding that its gender distinction was not a violation of the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gray H. Miller</span> American judge

Gray Hampton Miller is a senior United States district judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas.

Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984), was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States overturning the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit's application of a Minnesota antidiscrimination law. The case established what was at the time the prevailing framework for analyzing claims of associative freedom, holding that the Minneapolis branch of the United States Jaycees could not bar women from becoming voting members.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Military Selective Service Act</span> 1948 US Federal law regarding selective service

The Selective Service Act of 1948, also known as the Elston Act, was a United States federal law enacted June 24, 1948, that established the current implementation of the Selective Service System.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bernard D. Rostker</span> American government official (born 1944)

Bernard Daniel Rostker was Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy from 1977 to 1979; Director of the United States Selective Service System from 1979 to 1981; Assistant Secretary of the Navy from 1994 to 1998; Under Secretary of the Army from 1998 to 2000; and Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness in 2000–2001. From 1996 to 2001, he also served as Special Assistant to the Deputy Secretary of Defense for Gulf War Illnesses.

Elgin v. Department of the Treasury, 567 U.S. 1 (2012), was a United States Supreme Court case where the Court ruled that the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA) gives exclusive jurisdiction for claims under the Act to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Additionally, the Court held that the Act bars federal district courts from ruling on matters related to the act including adverse employment actions of the federal departments, and allows the Merit Systems Protection Board to hear constitutional arguments for wrongful employee severance and adverse employment actions. It was a 6–3 decision, with the majority opinion delivered by Justice Clarence Thomas. The case greatly limited the recourse of federal employees to the courts for adverse employment practices, allowing such recourse only to a few, specific courts as aforementioned.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conscription and sexism</span> Discrimination in military enlistment

Conscription, sometimes called "the draft", is the compulsory enlistment of people in a national service, most often a military service. Men have been subjected to military drafts in most cases. Currently only two countries conscript women and men on the same formal conditions: Norway and Sweden.

Altitude Express, Inc. v. Zarda, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), is a landmark United States Supreme Court civil rights case which ruled that under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 employees could not be discriminated against on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case which ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects transgender people from employment discrimination.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marc Angelucci</span> American lawyer and mens rights activist

Marc Etienne Angelucci was an American attorney, men's rights activist, and the vice-president of the National Coalition for Men (NCFM). As a lawyer, he represented several cases related to men's rights issues, most prominently National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System, in which the federal judge declared the male-only selective-service system unconstitutional. He was found murdered at his home on July 11, 2020.

References

  1. 1 2 Tyler Pager (February 24, 2019). "Drafting Only Men for the Military Is Unconstitutional, Judge Rules". The New York Times. Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  2. 1 2 Liptak, Adam (June 7, 2021). "Supreme Court Won't Hear Case on Limiting Military Draft to Men". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved June 7, 2021.
  3. 1 2 Higgens, Tucker (June 7, 2021). "Supreme Court won't hear case arguing military draft registration discriminates against men". CNBC . Retrieved June 7, 2021.
  4. ↑ "National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service System (4:16-cv-03362) Document #1: COMPLAINT". April 4, 2013.
  5. ↑ National Coalition for Men v. Selective Service (2016) 19 February 2016. U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Cir.
  6. ↑ "United States Courts Opinions. United States District Court Southern District of Texas. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 57 MOTION for Leave to File First Amended Complaint, DENYING MOTION for leave to transfer venue" (PDF). U.S. Government Publishing Office. August 16, 2017. Retrieved September 4, 2017.
  7. 1 2 Max Z. Margulies (March 27, 2020). "The National Commission on Public Service Is Right to Endorse Women's Draft Registration". Lawfare.
  8. 1 2 Inspired to Serve: The Final Report of the National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service (PDF) (Report). National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service. March 2020.
  9. ↑ National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service (January 23, 2019). "National Commission on Military, National, and Public Service: Interim Report". inspire2serve.gov.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  10. 1 2 "Judge Rules Male-Only Draft Violates Constitution".
  11. ↑ "United States Courts Opinions. United States District Court Southern District of Texas. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER" (PDF). February 22, 2019.
  12. ↑ Korte, Gregory (February 24, 2019). "With women in combat roles, a federal court rules the male-only draft unconstitutional". USA Today . Retrieved February 24, 2019.
  13. ↑ "Selective Service Defends Men-Only Draft In 5th Circ". Law360. August 15, 2019. Retrieved September 17, 2019.
  14. ↑ "AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF TEXAS; AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION; 9TO5, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WORKING WOMEN; A BETTER BALANCE; GENDER JUSTICE; KWH LAW CENTER FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE AND CHANGE; NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN FOUNDATION; NATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER; WOMEN'S LAW CENTER OF MARYLAND; and WOMEN'S LAW PROJECT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES" (PDF). National Women's Law Center. October 18, 2019. Archived (PDF) from the original on July 19, 2020. Retrieved July 19, 2020.
  15. ↑ Hasbrouck, Edward. "Appeals Court hears arguments on the Constitutionality of draft registration". Resisters.info. Retrieved March 6, 2020.
  16. ↑ National Coalition for Men vs. Selective Service System, No. 19-20272 (5th Cir.2020-08-13).
  17. ↑ Crouch, Harry. "National Coalition For Men" . Retrieved August 18, 2020.
  18. ↑ Hasbrouck, Edward (January 8, 2021). "Supreme Court asked to review Constitutionality of current male-only draft registration requirement". Antiwar.com. Retrieved January 8, 2021.
  19. ↑ "National Coalition For Men, et al., Petitioners v. Selective Service System, et al". Supreme Court of the United States. Retrieved January 12, 2021.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.