Document: 393 U.S. 233 89 S.Ct. 414 21 L.Ed.2d 402 James J. OESTEREICH, Petitioner,v.SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM LOCAL BOARD NO. 11, CHEYENNE, WYOMING, et al. No. 46. Argued Oct. 24, 1968. Decided Dec. 16, Melvin L. Wulf, New York City, for petitioner. Erwin N. Griswold, Sol. Gen., respondents. Mr. Justice DOUGLAS delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Petitioner is enrolled as a student at theological school preparing ministry and was accordingly classified IV—D by Selective Service Board. Section 6(g) Act, 62 Stat. 611, amended, now § Military Act 1967 (see 81 100, 1(a)), 50 U.S.C. App. 456(g), gives such students exemption from training service under Act.1 He returned his registration certificate to Government, according complaint in present action, 'for sole purpose expressing dissent participation United States war Vietnam.' Shortly thereafter Board declared him delinquent (1) failure have possession,2 (2) provide with notice local status. The thereupon changed classification I—A. took an administrative appeal lost ordered report induction. 2 At that point he brought suit restrain District Court dismissed complaint, 280 F.Supp. 78, Appeals affirmed. 390 F.2d 100. case here on petition writ certiorari which we granted. 391 912, 88 1804, 20 651. 3 As noted, states 'students ministry' qualified schools 'shall be exempt service' Act.3 Equally unambiguous 10(b)(3) 1967, 104, provides there shall no pre-induction judicial review 'of or processing any registrant,'4 being limited defense criminal prosecution or, Government concedes, habeas corpus after induction.5 See Estep v. States, 327 114, 123—125, 66 423, 428, 90 L.Ed. 567; Eagles ex rel. Samuels, 329 304, 67 313, 91 308; Witmer 348 375, 377, 75 392, 393, 99 428. If assume, must purposes, petitioner entitled statutory divinity student, what authority can withhold it withdraw make delinquent? 4 In Congress added provision concerning immediate members 'prime age group' expiration their deferment, stating they were first inducted 'after delinquents volunteers.' 456(h)(1) (1964 ed., Supp. III). has also made knowing neglect perform duty prescribed rules regulations System. 462(a) But did not define delinquency; nor standards its definition Yet Service, noted,6 promulgated governing delinquency uses them deprive registrants exemption, because various activities conduct without regard exemptions provided law. 5 We find authorization use delinquency. Even if had authorized Boards revoke means classifications, serious questions would arise silent prescribe govern Boards' actions. There suggestion legislative history that, when granted registrant meets terms conditions, nonetheless material grant withdrawal exemption. So hold free-wheeling agencies meting out brand justice vindictive manner. 6 Once person registers qualifies unrelated merits granting continuing Solicitor General confesses error proceedings purpose. 7 deal basically lawless. It different constitutional implications where induction ordained minister other clearly (a) retaliate against political views (b) bear down religious racial attitudes (c) get town so amorous interests member might better served. Townsend Zimmerman, Cir., 237 376. instances, one, exercise discretion evaluating evidence determining whether claimed deserved. decide today involves clear departure mandate. To deprived blatantly lawless manner either raise protest through defy defend refusal construe unnecessary harshness. suggests, literalness does violence mandate Our construction leaves unimpaired normal operations Act. 8 No believe, suggests sustain literal reading. For while purports face suspend vehicle reviewing conviction everyone agrees intent. Examples are legion language harmony requirements, Rumely, 345 41, 73 543, 97 770, taken organic whole. Clark Uebersee Finanz—Korp., AG, 332 480, 488—489, 68 174, 177, 92 88. think another illustration; agrees. Since plain unequivocal way contested here,7 since scope concept broad enough revocation right, sufficiently buttressed standards, conclude precluded cases this type. 9 reverse judgment remand opportunity prove facts alleged demonstrate jurisdictional requirements 28 1331. 10 Reversed. 11 HARLAN, concurring result. 12 I concur holding available case, but reach conclusion somewhat analysis contained my Brother DOUGLAS. 13 outset, important state involve. contend System improperly resolved factual questions, wrongfully exercised discretion, even acted 'basis fact,' phrase commonly used area 122—123, 427—428, 567 (1946); ante 238, n. 7. asserts, rather, procedure pursuant reclassified induction—a plainly mandated System's self-promulgated published regulations, 32 CFR, pt. 1642—is unlawful. Specifically, asserts reclassification scheme statute, inconsistent ministerial approved Congress, facially unconstitutional.1 14 pivotal 10(b)(3), statute's proscription * *.' take 'classification processing' encompass numerous discretionary, factual, mixed law-fact determinations prior issuing order do understand prohibit claim, petitioner, very statutes administers invalid. 15 'Classification key selection,' CFR 1622.1(b), among Board's most functions 'to decide, subject appeal, class each placed.' 1622.1(c). Classification highly individualized process, consider all pertinent information presented it. Ibid. Thus, may required determine, conflicting record, conscientiously opposed form, 1622.14, registrant's deferment 'is national interest paramount importance our security 1622.20. A exercises considerable registrants—for example, securing relevant classification, §§ 1621.9—1621.15, scheduling physical examinations, 1628, postponement itself, 1632. 16 Congress' decision defer decisions until was, responsive two major considerations. First, these discretionary nature, court often examine records documentary evidence, testimony, resolve controversies sizable record. though narrow, see supra, S.Ct., 427—428 cannot done quickly. stay pending work havoc orderly into Nation's armed forces. 113 Cong.Rec. 15426 (Senator Russell); cf. 137, 434 (Mr. Frankfurter, result). 17 Second, been afforded, induction, hearing appeals within pts. 1624 1627. properly presumed fully considered it, processed regularly, accordance applicable regulations. Greer 378 931 (1967); Storey 370 255 (1966); Chemical Foundation, 272 1, 14—15, 47 6, 71 131 (1926); Chin Yow 208 8, 12, 201, 202, 52 369 (1908); Martin Mott, Wheat. 19, 537 (1827). 18 These factors significantly altered contends employed invalid face. 19 claim invite inherent registrants, not, therefore, protracted delay. sure, collateral determinations—for subjected statute regulation drawn question (in procedure)—may sometimes necessary. But, general, dispose challenge validity pleadings. Insubstantial claims usually weeded dispatch.2 itself only renders irrelevant presumption regularity,3 presents issue beyond competence hear determine. Adjudication constitutionality congressional enactments4 generally thought jurisdiction agencies. Public Utilities Comm'n State California 355 534, 539, 78 446, 450, 470 (1958); Engineers Co. SEC, U.S.App.D.C. 199, 215—216, 138 936, 952—953 (1943), moot, 788, 96, 370. power promulgate expressly delegated pass statutes. Such readily inferred, composition boards, procedures, render wholly unsuitable forums adjudication matters: consist part-time, uncompensated members, chosen ideally representative registrants' communities;5 fact represented counsel proceedings, 1624.1(b), seems incompatible consideration purely legal claims. Indeed, denial justified ground nonjudicial. Sturgis, 342 328, (1965), cert. denied, 382 879, 86 164, 120; Capehart, D.C., 141 708, 719 (1956), aff'd, 388 352 971, 77 363, 324. thus liberty competent forum—agency court—his substantial unlawful procedure. interpretation problems,6 indicated history,7 language, On foregoing basis agree forbid instance. 22 Because both passed petitioner's ripe consideration. Whatever circumstances, possess conceded ministry. 23 STEWART, whom BRENNAN WHITE join, dissenting. 24 enacting 1967,1 intended specify exclusive methods judicially reviewed. premature, affirm Appeals. 25 part follows: 26 'No President, except instituted section title, responded affirmatively negatively unquestioned overriding prevent litigious interruptions procedures necessary military manpower.'2 inartistically drawn, background whatever difficulties otherwise imprecision draftsman's language. 27 interpreting less explicit predecessor statutes,3 established general rule draft classifications could reviewed time inducted. Review held proper challenges raised following inducted, initiated 428; Billings Truesdell, 321 542, 64 737, 917; Falbo 320 549, 346, 305. Occasionally, however, federal courts allowed exceptions rule.4 proposed enacted shortly Second Circuit had, well-publicized Wolff Local Bd. 372 817, permitted just exception.5 adopting specifically disapproved those deviated review, absolute commitment premature interference registrants. Senate Armed Services Committee put matter way: 29 'Until recently, problem observance finality provision. several recent cases, district selective prematurely. committee attaches much provisions reemphasizes original intent should occur remedies exhausted himself induction.'6 30 similar statement included House Committee: 31 'The disturbed apparent inclination some action boards before remedies. Existing law quite precludes order. view prematurely inquire rewritten more enunciate principle. prompted continued disregard principle seriously affect administration System.'7 Although contains reference remedy inductees seeking recognized Congress. (Emphasis added.) one who responds cannot, course, 'defense prosecution' refusing inducted; corpus, Report understanding regard: 33 'A submit legality classification.'8 34 Thus doubt designed permit connection prosecutions proceedings. Today, however holds mean says like this, 'plain record ha(s) granted.'9 said, 'clash' between 10(b)(3). With respect, am simply unable perceive whatsoever. Exemptions substantive, procedural, specifying substantive rights asserted. How somehow 'violence to' mystery me.10 35 reason offers casual obedience lead 'unnecessary harshness.' constitutional, harsh. That us. And law's constitutionality.11 contrary, upheld day Gabriel, 256, 424, 418, reaffirmation previous enunciated applied determinations.12 36 'construction Act.' implication exceptional. carved 'exception' exactly kind where, stake, exception least justified. precisely jeopardized procedural limitations For, acknowledged, 'the Department prosecute (such registrant) refuses promptly confess submits brings action.'13 37 upon whose burden harshly falls. choose run risk uncertain hope prevailing proceeding. will fateful choice. light allowance stands irrational unjustified. 38 respectfully dissent. reads 'Regular duly ministers religion, defined direction churches organizations, satisfactorily pursuing full-time courses instruction schools, leading entrance pre-enrolled, (but registration) title.' 1617.1 Regulations requires personal possession times (32 1617.1), 1642.4, 1642.4(a), whenever fails 'any duty' (apart obey induction) declare 'a delinquent.' admits purposes proceeding motion dismiss satisfies 6(g). civilian determined form: Provided go herein reserved President assigned registrant.' S.Rep. 209, 90th Cong., 1st Sess., 10, stated: classification.' 305, Jehovah's Witness given conscientious objector status domestic camp lieu service. disobeying order, argued board wrongly denying minister. Without deciding envisaged exhausting reporting, accepted, still rejected mental disabilities, omitted 'necessary intermediate step united continuous process army speedily efficiently.' Id., 553, 348. 567, petitioners Witnesses denied challenged service, then found nothing 1940 preclude Supra, 2. contest over, say, quantum classification. Then able say therefore clash makes arguments discuss. Moreover, hesitant preliminary injunction staying strong showing likely succeed merits. suggestive analogy Court's civil removal 1443. Where valid face, treat defendant fairly, permitted. Georgia Rachel, 384 780, 803 804, 1783, 1796, 925 Virginia Rives, 100 321—323, 667 (1880). qualifications pertinent, remove cause invalid: 'When denies interposes bar enforcing tribunals, fair controlled 321. Greenwood Peacock, 808, 1800, 944 (1966). noted urges Brief Respondents 71. 1603.3, 1604.22; Memorandum Hereshey, S.Doc. 82, 89th 2d 4; Weekly Compilation Presidential Documents, March 13, p. 395; National Advisory Commission 74 79 (1967). agent—'whenever possible, experience,' 1604.71(c)—his responsibilities assisting 'interpreting laws, directives,' 1604.71(d)(4), 'equally diligent protecting matters.' 1604.71(d)(5). doubtful heard tribunal adjudicate Cf. Kwong Hai Chew Colding, 344 590, 596—598, 472, 477—478, 576 (1953); Opp Cotton Mills, Inc. Administrator, etc., 312 126, 152—153, 61 524, 535—536, 85 624 (1941); Illinois Central R. Co., 291 457, 463, 54 471, 473, 909 (1934); Londoner City County Denver, 210 373, 385, S.T. 713, 1103 Dixon Alabama Education, 294 150 (1961). Ewing Mytinger & Casselberry, Inc., 339 594, 70 870, 94 1088 (1950); Bowles Willingham, 503, 520, 641, 650, 892 (1944); North American Cold Storage Chicago, 211 306, 101, 53 195 (1908). summary deprivation full turn availability prompt subsequent hearing, U.S.Const., Amdt. VI; Ewell, 383 116, 120, 773, 776, 627 Freedman Maryland, 380 51, 734, 649 (1965) something meaningfully here, option defending Ex parte Young, 209 123, 441, 714 Oklahoma Operating Love, 252 331, 40 338, 596 (1920); Reisman Caplin, 375 440, 84 508, 459 (1964), filing ante, 235—236; U.S., 129—130, 430—431 (concurring Murphy). exacerbated nonfrivolous argument constitutes 'punishment' violation jury trial, right counsel, requisites. Kennedy Mendoza-Martinez, 144, 168—169, 83 554, 567—568, 644 (1963). issue. valid, tantamount permitting imposition punishment, followed loss liberty, possibility bail, secure release corpus. This would, least, cut grain fundamental tradition. Hart, Power Limit Jurisdiction Federal Courts: An Exercise Dialectic, Harv.L.Rev. 1362, 1380—1383 (1953). salient parts sparse set STEWART'S dissenting opinion, post, 247—248. Both committees 'disturbed remedies.' H.R.Rep.No. 267, U.S.Code Cong. Admin.News 1333; S.Rep.No. discussed preceding text, themselves (This making come appeals, favor grounds, obviating need further review. 549—550, 455—456; Aircraft Diesel Equipment Corp. Hirsch, 331 752, 772, 1493, 1503, 1796 (1947). Appendix 4.) precipitated Circuit's 817 247; Respondent 4, 69, 32. Wolff, well 'recent cases' reports probably referred, construing antecedent involved maladministered misapplied laws themselves. supra (loss participating demonstration); 376 (1956) (failure follow procedure); Schwartz Strauss, 206 767 (1953) opinion) (misclassification); Fabiani, 105 139 (1952) (refusal recognize foreign medical deferment); Tomlinson Hershey, 95 72 (1949) request (entitlement exemption); 305 (1944) status). 460(b)(3) amends supersedes Universal Training (1967) Russell). 10(a)(2) 1940, 893: '(D)ecisions final (administrative) 119, 427—429. 376; opinion); 139; 72. demonstrated hostilities Vietnam. 30—31 (1967), 1333. 10. limit 'exemptions'; yet 'deferments' 'plainly' See, e.g., III); 1622.25 (1968) (full-time college students). separate HARLAN. His founded proposition problems system 'deprive(d) procedure.' HARLAN seeks avoid viewing prohibit, delays merely result absence indicates, interruption glimmer section's sorts delay others. difficult reconcile distinction draw—between 'that face' determinations—with recognition enactment reaction 817. dispute whatsoever; admitted facts, 'delinquency' entirely unauthorized Nor theory suggested presenting justifiable decision. noteworthy, all, ever advanced Furthermore, persons arrested offenses routinely liberty—to greater extent than inductees—without claims, bail. Preliminary hearings magistrates, large, determine existence prima facie prosecution, begin defenses raised, legal, constitutional. necessarily compel liberty. position free refuse keeping open raising him. course—and case—that instituted. freedom speech, scheduled 'chilling effect' First Amendment activity. bona fide return protected expression. O'Brien, 367, 1673, 672. 550, 347, instance, reported sought claiming—as here—'that forms Court, Black, 'Even were, argues, requirement test board, certain intervention acceptance individual service.' 423; 737. 70, 33.

Category: 1