1 minute read

Selective Service v. Minnesota Public Interest Research Group

Significance, Uncle Sam And Eligible Young Men, Questions Of Punitive Intent And Compulsion, Marshall's Dissent: "a De Facto Classification Based On Wealth"


Selective Service System of the United States


Minnesota Public Interest Research Group, et al.

Appellant's Claim

That section 12(f) of the Military Selective Service Act did not constitute a bill of attainder or a violation of the Fifth Amendment protection against compelled self-incrimination.

Chief Lawyer for Appellant

Rex E. Lee, U.S. Solicitor General

Chief Lawyer for Appellee

William J. Keppel

Justices for the Court

Warren E. Burger (writing for the Court), Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White

Justices Dissenting

William J. Brennan, Jr., Thurgood Marshall (Harry A. Blackmun did not participate)


Washington, D.C.

Date of Decision

5 July 1984


That section 12(f) of the Military Selective Service Act, which denied federal financial assistance to male students between the ages of 18 and 26 who had not registered for the draft, constituted neither a bill of attainder nor a violation of appellees' Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination.

Related Cases

  • Cummings v. Missouri, 4 Wall. 277 (1867).
  • Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333 (1867).
  • Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 (1967).
  • Marchetti v. United States, 390 U.S. 39 (1968).
  • Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70 (1973).
  • Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S. 425 (1977).


University of Minnesota Office of Financial Aid. 1998.

Additional topics

Law Library - American Law and Legal InformationNotable Trials and Court Cases - 1981 to 1988