Selective Draft Law Cases - Significance, A "supreme And Noble Duty", Further Readings
Joseph F. Arver, et al.
United States of America
That the Selective Draft Act of 1917 violated Article I, Section 8 and the First and Thirteenth Amendments, among other provisions of the Constitution.
Chief Lawyers for Appellants
T. E. Latimer, Edwin T. Taliferro, Harry Weinberger
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
John W. Davis, Solicitor General
Justices for the Court
Louis D. Brandeis, John Hessin Clarke, William Rufus Day, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Joseph McKenna, James Clark McReynolds, Mahlon Pitney, Willis Van Devanter, Edward Douglass White (writing for the Court)
Date of Decision
7 January 1918
Denied the appellants' claim.
- United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
- Clay v. United States, 403 U.S. 698 (1971).
- Rostker v. Goldberg, 453 U.S. 57 (1981).
- Selective Service System v. Minnesota Public Interest Research Group, 468 U.S. 841 (1984).
- Inc. South Carolina State Highway Department v. Barnwell Bros. - Significance, Intrastate And Interstate Interests Treated The Same, Future Restrictions On The States, Big Rig Road Hazards
- The Scottsboro Trials: 1931-37 - "legal Lynching â€¦ Victims Of 'capitalist Justice", "you Can't Mix Politics With Law"
- Selective Draft Law Cases - Significance
- Selective Draft Law Cases - Further Readings
- Selective Draft Law Cases - A "supreme And Noble Duty"
- Other Free Encyclopedias