Document: 348 U.S. 375 75 S.Ct. 392 99 L.Ed. 428 Philip Andrew WITMER, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES of America. No. 164. Argued Feb. 1, 1955. Decided March 14, Mr.Hayden C. Covington, Brooklyn, N.Y., for petitioner. Mr. Julius F. Bishop, Washington, D.C., respondent. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion Court. 1 Petitioner, a member Jehovah's Witnesses, stands convicted failing to submit induction into armed forces in violation § 12(a) Universal Military Training and Service Act, 62 Stat. 622, 50 U.S.C.Appendix, 462(a), U.S.C.A.Appendix, 462(a). On trial, he centered his defense on contention that was wrongfully denied exemption as conscientious objector. This Term, we have been asked review relatively large number criminal prosecutions involving various procedural substantive problems encountered effectuating congressional policy exempting objectors from military service. We granted petitions certiorari this three following cases, 812, 42, consider certain recurring these prosecutions.1 2 Section 6(j) 612, amended, 456(j), provides no person who, 'by reason religious training belief, is conscientiously opposed participation war any form', shall be required undergo combatant or service forces. The objector, prove claim, fills out questionnaire which makes short statement beliefs cites evidence, such prior public expression views, demonstrate sincerity. If, basis personal interview, local Board decides requisite are sincerely held, registrant will classified If denies has right appeal Appeal Board. That Board, before reaching final decision, refers registrant's file Department 'inquiry hearing.' As first step auxiliary procedure, Federal Bureau Investigation investigates claim its report hearing officer Justice. may then appear present evidence witnesses behalf. After this, superiors Justice, suggesting disposition case. Department, after reviewing file, FBI officer, writes recommendation, stating reasons whether it concurred overruled suggestion officer. recommendation transmitted placed file. statute 'the board shall, making give consideration to, but not bound follow, * *.' 613, 456(j). then, full it, comes conclusion, which, usual case, determination Selective System. 620, 460(b)(3), 460(b)(3). 3 There direct judicial actions Boards. Questions concerning classification raised either petition habeas corpus prosecution failure All four cases decided today arisen through latter route. 4 January 31, 1951, Witmer filed questionnaire, together with an explanatory letter worked 40 hours week hat factory also cultivated portion father's farm. In letter, stated intended bring more farm under cultivation closed, 'For I am appealing you grant me agricultural assure increase production year year, contribute satisfactory amount effort civilian use.'2 5 general expressly disclaimed ministerial by writing phrase, 'Does apply,' opposite line inquiring 'Minister, Student Preparing Ministry.' He did however, although, special form those claiming classifications, failed fill specifications supporting objections noncombatant form, witmer wrote 'My belief relation Supreme Being involves duties superior arising human relation. prevents turning aside owe Being.' Therefore, wrote, maintain neutrality 'combats world,' permitted use force only 'at command Almighty God.' Although inserted negative answer question asking had given objector claimed demonstrated convictions studying Bible telling others about God's Kingdom 'of how put stop all wars.' 6 February 21, I—A, denying claims farmer Eight days later, advising them their action requesting 'a minister gospel.' Less than posting left job factory, shortly thereafter, at appearance presented affidavit Witnesses 'on many occasions' engaged 'preaching good news gospel others.' At same time, submitted written carried Bibles study aids door door, and, further, one could ordained without attending seminary performing funeral marriage ceremonies. 'The work now do greatest universal importance therefore take part conflict national even international importance.' conclusion hearing, felt warrant 'informed case would sent up physical examination.'3 7 pursuant forwarded Apparently, contained nothing unfavorable petitioner included statements appeared 'very very sincere' said wrong go war. 8 asserted engage since boy who snow balls just responsible throws them.' entire including suggested classification. concluded Witmer's inconsistent offer precluded recommended denied. consideration, retained when ordered induction, refused submit. followed, conviction, 115 F.Supp. 19, affirmed Court Appeals Third Circuit, 213 F.2d 95. 42. 9 primary here whether, facts narrow scope permits us overturn System's refusal status. It well remember courts sit super draft boards, substituting judgments weight designated agencies. Nor should they look substantial support determinations. Dickinson v. United States, 1953, 346 389, 396, 74 152, 157, 98 132. can overturned if 'no fact.' Estep 1946, 327 114, 122, 66 423, 427, 90 567. 155, 132, most recent applied standard particular set holding objective based full-time were undisputed, him squarely within terms Act. say motivated sincere principles becoming minister, deep, merely, Act provides, 'regular duly religion' therein defined. held Board's decision fact, there being 'incompatible proof exemption' rebut prima facie 10 Petitioner argues specific incompatible But made means facts—he religion.' Here cannot make alone, because ultimate sincerity objecting, grounds, form. relevant insofar help determining purely subjective question. therefore, fact casts doubt veracity relevant. 'affirmative painted complete accurate picture supra, page 157. short, nature determines type needed claim. issue activities, Dickinson, providing 'basis fact' must tend show activities other stated. here, faith some inference insincerity bad faith. 11 Since apparent sincerity, find indication anywhere record demeanor shifty evasive unreliability, examine see cast 12 note farmer, knew land involved request 23 years, save few acres used family purposes. swore apply him. Yet March—after denied—he fervently minister.4 Furthermore, although papers promised 'contribute effort.' Subsequently, announced These themselves considerable petitioner's merely separate classifications; goes honesty objection mere suspicion speculation conclude, now-abandoned insincere objection. Even firemen become dubious two false alarms. Aside outright admission deception—to expect pure naivety—there competent against drawn own testimony conduct. indications while possibly insignificant standing context finding insincerity. Among adduce allegedly deeply 13 With due regard Congress, System where conflicting inferences testimony, hold decision. 14 complains formally reopening meeting application reclassification minister. According clerk chairman hands taken appeal. shows proof, discuss matter. told new entitle exemption. true 1624.2(b) (c) Regulations, 32 CFR (1949 ed.), reopened reclassified. However, view concurrent findings trial judge had, reconsideration personally advised continuance I—A classification, think regulation reopen reclassify honored, though tagged words. state record, narrows down cavilling. No prejudice error. judgment affirmed. 15 Affirmed. 16 BLACK DOUGLAS dissent. 17 MINTON, concurring. 18 Because order allowable law arbitrarily taken, concur result wide divergencies presented, opinions. (See 397, 403, 409.) indicates except garden tract minute follows: 'March 1951 'Re: Order #36—28—30—71 met today. informed place employment 3, years factory. immediately pointed 1—A meant position weeks later. mentioned father going start getting shape. Prior time gotten shape so dependent upon people. Gospel substantiate paraphernalia Watchtower Association Jehovah Witness (sic). (sic) became started distributing literature. sufficient 4—D Classification examination.' R. 33 34, 54—55. Ordinarily unfounded law, reflect adversely faith, doctrine ministers.

Category: 2