Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Breen v. Selective Service Local Board No. 16 Et Al.

• 1969 • 396 U.S. 460 • Burger Court
In Breen v. Selective Service Local Board No. 16 et al., the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of a college student who had been reclassified by his local draft board from II-S (deferred due to being a full-time student) to I-A (available for unrestricted military service), after he participated in an anti-war demonstration and turned in his draft card as part of the protest. The court held that this action violated the First Amendment rights of free speech and expression, stating that such...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Burger Court
Term: 1969
Docket: 65
396 U.S. 460
90 S. Ct. 661
24 L. Ed. 2d 653
1970 U.S. LEXIS 3134
Argued: Nov 19, 1969

Breen v. Selective Service Local Board No. 16 Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In Breen v. Selective Service Local Board No. 16 et al., the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of a college student who had been reclassified by his local draft board from II-S (deferred due to being a full-time student) to I-A (available for unrestricted military service), after he participated in an anti-war demonstration and turned in his draft card as part of the protest. The court held that this action violated the First Amendment rights of free speech and expression, stating that such punitive actions could not be taken against individuals expressing their political views through nonviolent means. Furthermore, it was determined that turning in one's draft card did not equate with refusing military service altogether - thus, there were no grounds for changing Breen's classification status based on this act alone.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Breen v. Selective Service Local Board No. 16, Justice Hugo Black argued that the majority's decision was a misinterpretation of Congress' intent in drafting the Military Selective Service Act of 1967. He contended that Congress intended to provide draft deferments only to students who maintained satisfactory academic standing and not those engaging in misconduct or violating school rules, as was the case with Breen. The justice believed that allowing such individuals to maintain their student deferment status would undermine respect for law and order, which he considered essential during times of war and national emergency. Furthermore, he expressed concern about judicial overreach into legislative territory by interpreting laws based on personal views rather than congressional intent.

Opinion written by Justice HLBlack
Decided: Jan 26, 1970
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcript
Argued: Oct 05, 2026
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms