Document: 402 U.S. 479 91 S.Ct. 1565 29 L.Ed.2d 47 Vincent Francis McGEE, Jr., Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 362. Argued Feb. 23, 1971. Decided May 17, Syllabus Petitioner applied in 1966 for conscientious objector status to his local Selective Service board, which advised him that claim would be passed on when student deferment expired. His board was told 1967 petitioner had been accepted a graduate program where, petitioner's own view, he 'probably qualify' theological exemption. However, no request ministerial made, nor pertinent supporting information presented. refused fill out current questionnaire sent graduation from college, announcing not cooperate with the System. Following board's subsequent reclassification of I—A, did seek personal appearance before or appeal review. thereafter submit induction, which, along other draft law violations, prosecuted and convicted. The Court Appeals, rejecting defense erred its classification, affirmed. Held: Petitioner's failure exhaust administrative remedies jeopardized interest System, as agency responsible classifying registrants, developing facts using expertise assess claims exempt thus bars erroneously classified. McKart v. United States, 395 185, 89 1657, 23 194, factually distinguished. Pp. 483—491. 426 F.2d 691, Alan H. Levine, New York City, petitioner. William Bradford Reynolds respondent, pro hac vice, by special leave Court. Mr. Justice MARSHALL delivered opinion 1 convicted failing induction violations laws. principal involves contention incorrectly classified board. Appeals ruled this barred because failed pursue remedies. We granted certiorari. 400 864, 101, 27 103 (1970), consider applicability 'exhaustion remedies' doctrine circumstances case. 2 * In February 1966, while attending University Rochester, status. support exemption submitted form objectors (SSS Form 150), setting forth views concerning participation war.1 continued existing classification—student deferment—and upon longer applied. 3 April wrote President Johnson, enclosing charred remnants cards declaring conviction must 'sever every link violence war.' letter included statement 'already study where I probably qualify deferment.' A copy forwarded board; deferment. graduated June 1967, 127), asked inter alia specific future educational plans generally any thought should called attention. returned unanswered announced cover henceforth adhere policy non-cooperation 4 September reviewed file, rejected pending claim,2 reclassified I—A. response sought neither review Indeed, pursuant noncooperation, unopened, communication notifying right appear confer Government agent, appeal. physical examination ordered take place October 1967. He respond an order January 1968, took at time. induction. 5 prosecuted, under § 12(a) Military Act 62 Stat. 622, amended, 50 U.S.C. App. 462(a) (1964 ed., Supp. V) applicable regulations,3 (count I), report pre-induction II), keep possession valid classification notice III), requested relevant IV). all four counts sentenced two years' imprisonment each count, sentences run concurrently. liability refusing induction4 I—A.5 one judge dissenting, held incorrect available correction such error. affirmed Appeals. II 6 Two Terms ago, 194 (1969), surveyed exhaustion cases, policies underpin doctrine. As it has evolved since Falbo 320 549, 64 346, 88 L.Ed. 305 (1944), Estep 327 114, 66 423, 90 567 (1946), properly invoked operates restrict judicial scrutiny action having do registrant, case registrant who normal side-stepped corrective process might have cured rendered moot very defect later complained court. Cf. Oestereich System Local Board, 393 233, 235—236, n. 5, 414, 415—416, 21 (1968); Gibson 329 338, 349—350, 67 301, 306—307, 331 (1946). stands proposition is inflexibly situations, but decision also plainly contemplates situations litigant's will lose vitality litigant contest rights forum. result criminal context doubt substantial detriment defendant whose are barred. Still unhappy may justified particular considerations relating integrity limited role courts deciding proper registrants.6 7 After task courts, case, ask 'whether allowing similarly situated registrants bypass (the avenue question) seriously impair System's ability perform functions.' U.S., 197, S.Ct., 1665. specified salient interests registrant's Certain failures deny system important opportunities 'to make factual record' purposes exercise discretion apply expertise' course decisionmaking. Id., 1663. There danger relaxation requirements, certain circumstances, induce 'frequent deliberate flouting processes,' thereby undermining scheme decisionmaking Congress created. 195, And course, strict requirement tends ensure additional discover correct errors,' help obviate occasion Ibid. 8 To weighed against harsh impact bar claims. Surely insubstantial procedural default shield invalid correction, simply time-saving self-correction involved. That single conceivably slighted exhaust, however innocuous respects, recognizes 'blindly case.' 201, 1666. acknowledges fear flouting' can easily overblown, 'foolhardy' indeed withhold scrutiny. 200, Thus rigors relaxed met mechanical recitation broad usually served rather assessed light discrete analysis question, see whether there 'a governmental compelling enough' justify forfeiting 9 focal record, expertise.' denial 'sole surviving son' Later issue McKart's entitlement arose context, heard despite exhaust. validity question 'solely statutory interpretation.' 197—198, inhibit making record—all 198 15, fact resolution aided expertise; interpretation provision matter discretion. 10 present same pivotal—but here apparent McGee's jeopardize full gathering utilization expertise, than contrary. Unlike dispute about involved McKart, status—as objector—depended application bodies resolving underlying issues fact. Factfinding committed primarily process, ascertain 'basis fact' determination. See 460(b)(3) V); 122—123, 427—428; cf. Witmer 348 375, 380—381, 75 392, 395—396, 99 428 (1955). expressly noted turning particularistic questions, 'the stronger decided first instance then considers anew.' 16, id., 200 1666—1667. This 'stronger interest,' become fully sufficient invocation B 11 argues erroneous, never claim. regard status, McGee made effort invoke processes factfinding, It true vagrant bits come attention raising bare possibility student,7 hardly changes picture thoroughgoing attempt sidestep serious 12 Such directly jeopardizes functional autonomy conferred primary responsibility decide questions registrants.8 1665, (1969); 32 CFR 1622.1(c). Here without excuse, automatically out, given minimal showing investigatory board.9 imposed here, depends careful completely sidestepped designed marshal resolve instance. Dickinson 346 389, 74 152, 156—157, 98 132 (1953). C 13 war. filled appended further beliefs, prima facie Since time—1966—petitioner undergraduate deferment, postponed consideration 'higher' classification. 1623.2. after graduated, reviewed10 rejected, contends erroneous board,11 classifies de novo.12 14 cut off seem too hard result, assuming, admits, written provided basis exemption, ruled, conduct relation conscription acts came into view. 697 (CA2 1970); 700—701 (dissenting opinion). But even assuming above, dual exhaust—his either secure appeal—implicates decisively requirement, especially purpose ensuring opportunity 'make 'apply When ultimately facts, airing within prominent, noted, 'cannot those persons fail court anyway.' 699. 15 Conscientious turn nature beliefs war, Gillette 401 437, 828, 28 168 (1971), objection conscience religion, Welsh 398 333, 1792, 26 308 sincerity, 381, 395, 456(j) V). declined securing appearance, deprived supplement record facts. restored While apparently satisfied confronted,13 novo, determined supplemented board.14 1626.23. only factfinding available; removed containing submissions results inquiry sincerity. 16 unless character, istrants encouraged once submission carefully drafted 150. Should denied level, claimant tempted circumvent fact-gathering processes, chance contains somewhat extreme situation presented though, reason bona fides supervening noncooperation system. remains excuse. fanciful think processes' occur if others were allowed press their III 17 conclude classification,15 therefore judgment below 18 Affirmed. 19 DOUGLAS, dissenting. 20 so far agreed objector. expressed belief 'in Supreme Being whom obligation superior duties human relations considered'; said 'taking part military operation indicates approval/consent repugnant love service God fellowman.' majority concluded '(n)either prior actions inconsistent assertions we nothing file—all board—that could reasonably put sincerity issue.' 697. Judge Feinberg dissent agreed. 703. Roman Catholic studying Union Theological Seminary preparing ministry. dedication moral cause questioned. 22 critical Board 'consider' reject District pass now refuses contrary, because, says, finding 'clearly erroneous.' clearly seems reads entire record. advice received dated March follows: 'We wish advise your considered you classification.' states 'claim objector' later. inference clear—that decided. 24 Chairman testified considered, 'because young man college my rated 2S qualification proceeded give him.' he, felt 'that weren't motivate me grant sought.' Yet ambiguous cry concluding duty Regulations classify lowest class eligible.' clear II—S lower objector, I—O. 25 respects testified: '* recall subsequently finished left don't recall, merit time, sir, based file what already gave 1A doing that, again appeared file.' 'He school alternative 1A.' Chairman's testimony I—A supposition stated: 'Based our previous determination denied, time 1A, did. 'Q. You didn't previously? 'A. Yes—' 30 yet, testified, 1966: Lande (board Chairman): 31 'When return asking grounds read requests. stated before, reading rate Lande, am understanding respect then, board? 33 'The Court: Are talking original receipt application? 34 'Mr. Meyer (counsel petitioner): Yes, Honor. 35 Or they learned college? 36 Meyer: receipt. 37 said, it, decision.' 38 is, due respect, think, miscarriage justice allow prison best dubious saying discharged considering passing 39 loom itself transparent one. face detract it. priesthood, send sanction trickery act quite irresponsibly. 40 If 'lawless' Board. 41 defaulted, McGee. Its 'receive information, it.' 1622.1(c) (italics added). deferred merits, way timely 42 much dispensing need 194. enjoyed IV—A (sole son status) until mother died. Then ground 'family unit' ceased exist. excused rationalized 43 'In short, contributes significantly fairly low number subject themselves prosecution Accordingly, appears significant reaches believe foreclose review.' 44 By like reasoning, cases does few between. Moreover, term key Regulation just phrase McKart. Men go boards derelict vindictive. 45 reverse conviction. connection intended continue actual ordained Priesthood.' registering 1961, informed seminary, ministry direction Church. Subsequently seminary enrolled secular university. 10, infra. 1632.14; 1628.16; 1623.5; 1641.7(b). argued would, valid, defeat charged III, well count I. contended, Court, merits reclassifying denying matriculated being never, however, student. infra, 486—488. Certainly late day launch broadside whole attempts, name some legal premature access seeking affirmatively challenge action. 193—195, 1662—1663, (1969). Nor tenable say inappropriate fashioned congressional command. 193—194, 1664; 206, 1669 (White, J., concurring result). rationale lies intimately related functioning constructed. Mulloy 410, 416, 1766, 1771, 362 (1970); transmitted declared studies view 'would sole actually reached circuitously, contained hint projected Seminary, though whatever matters 9, reliance communicated him, FBI agents assistant States attorney, more farfetched. Memorandum 56 (August 18, 1954) prescribed '(t)o substantiate student, require furnish' evidence. directive places burden relieves produce unsolicited evidence registrant' efforts thwarted refusal 127) him. Thus, relevance falls short initial proofs. emphasis mandatory language students, U.S.C.App. 456(g) (such 'shall exempt'), misplaced. definite formal submitted. developed trial below, less scraps unsupportable. 456(g), provides 'students recognized churches religious organizations, satisfactorily pursuing full-time courses instruction divinity schools shall *.' 1622.43(a). Evidence aired showed engaged nondenominational seminary. eventually priest, scant evidence, any, tending indicate 'under direction' church. determined, 'denial (ministerial student) fact." 696 1970). Though ambiguous, found specifically disturb finding, approved below. §§ 1624.1, 1624.2. 1626.2, 1626.26. summon interview inquire done. 41, amended July 30, 1968 (rescinded August 27, wide powers. 1621.14, 1621.15, 1625.1(c). figures I, II, III. two-year concurrently, decline IV, minor offense comparison

Category: 2