p. 1 |
Previous | 1 of 8 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
Loading content ...
EMERSON DARNELL Chairman
FAY KNOPF» Vice Chi WWW
GFORGE WILL0UGH8Y Treasurer
MARVIN M. KARRATKÏN General Cowws«
An Agency for Miiitary mû Draft Counseling . .ftRi0T^M ■ Nation3! seere{^
" ■* ^ e JOHN H. GlNAVEN Administrative Secretary
2016 Walnut Street, Philadelphia. Pennsylvania Î9103 • (215) 568-7971 DOusi î-ahnswohth Finance secretary
■ - THE IN-SERVICE CO AND THE FEDERAL-AMD MIIITARY-COURTS
'FEBRUARY, 1970
I« One who by reason of religious training and belief is opposed to participation
in war in any form is not subject to combat training and service in the armed
forces.
Department of Defense Directive 1300.6, 1 SSLR 2325
Army: AR 635-20 (Nov. 10, 1969), 1 SSLR 2343;
Navy: BUPERSMANÜAL Article 1860120 (July 1, 1969);
Air Force: AFR 35-24 (Mar. 25, 1969). 1 SSLR 2347;
Marines: MCO 1306.16B (June 18, 1969), 1 SSLR 2353;
Army National Guard, Army Reserves: AR 135-25 (Apr. 11, 1969)', 1 SSLR 2333;'
Other Reserves: regulations governing active duty personnel.
Cf, section 6 (j) of 196.7 draft act, 50 Ü.S.C. App. 456(j).
II. Habeas corpus is the appropriate remedy to test the legality of military custody
of a serviceman, and a federal court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.'2241•
Jones v. Cunningham. 371 U.S. 236 (1963)»
III» Jurisdiction, venue, and claims for special judicial relief..
A. District court has jurisdiction in mandamus proceeding against military
under 28 UrS.C. I36I.
Smith v. Resor, 406 F.2d 141, 1 SSLR 3320 (2d Cir. I969)?
Hancock v. Laird. 415 F 2d 234, 2 SSLR 3272 (9th Cir. 1969),
B. In certain circumstances, serviceman can judicially challenge denial c-f CO
discharge by petitioning for declaratory judgment.
Boraan v.. Resor. 302 F. Supp. 1200, 2 SSLR 32?1 (N.D. Cal. I969);
see Jarrett v. Resor, 2 SSLR 3272 (N.D. Cal. 1969);
Morbeto v. U.S.. 293 P. Supp. 3'3, 2 SSLR 3022 (CD. Cal. 1968).
C. District court has jurisdiction to review actions by military authorities
which violate military regulations.«
Dunmar v. Ailes, 348 F.2d 51 (D.C. Cir, 1965);
Stephens v. Smith, 294 P. Supp. 31, 2 SSLR 3022 (E.D. Va. 1968);
see Clark v. Brown, 414 F.2d 1159, 2 SSLR 3156 (D.C. Cir. 1969);
Smith v, Resor, 406 F„2d 141, 1 SSLR 3320 (2d Cir. 1969)?
McAbee v, Martinez, 291 F. Supp. 77 (D. Md. I968).
MIDWEST REGION (MCDC): 711 S. Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60605 • (312) 427-3350
WESTERN REGION: 437 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105 • (415) 397-6917
Object Description
| Title | The in-service CO and the federal and military courts (February, 1970) |
| Place of publication | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania |
| Publisher | Central Committee for Conscientious Objectors |
| Publication date | 1970 |
| Language | English |
| Country | United States |
| Digital Format | XML |
| Publisher-Electronic | Wisconsin Historical Society |
| Publication Date-Electronic | 2016 |
| Rights | Copyright belongs to the individuals who created them or the organizations for which they worked. We share them here strictly for non-profit educational purposes. If you believe that you possess copyright to material included here, please contact us at asklibrary@wisconsinhistory.org. Under the fair use provisions of the U.S. copyright law, teachers and students are free to reproduce any document for nonprofit classroom use. Commercial use of copyright-protected material is generally prohibited. |
| Owner | Brünn, Harris Watts Collection - Ephemera Soldiers Movements, International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam |
| Type | Text |
| Digital identifier | giEphemera867000 |
Description
| Title | p. 1 |
| Language | English |
| Digital Format | JPEG2000 |
| Publisher-Electronic | Wisconsin Historical Society |
| Publication Date-Electronic | 2016 |
| Rights | Copyright belongs to the individuals who created them or the organizations for which they worked. We share them here strictly for non-profit educational purposes. If you believe that you possess copyright to material included here, please contact us at asklibrary@wisconsinhistory.org. Under the fair use provisions of the U.S. copyright law, teachers and students are free to reproduce any document for nonprofit classroom use. Commercial use of copyright-protected material is generally prohibited. |
| Owner | Brünn, Harris Watts Collection - Ephemera Soldiers Movements, International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam |
| Full text | EMERSON DARNELL Chairman FAY KNOPF» Vice Chi WWW GFORGE WILL0UGH8Y Treasurer MARVIN M. KARRATKÏN General Cowws« An Agency for Miiitary mû Draft Counseling . .ftRi0T^M ■ Nation3! seere{^ " ■* ^ e JOHN H. GlNAVEN Administrative Secretary 2016 Walnut Street, Philadelphia. Pennsylvania Î9103 • (215) 568-7971 DOusi î-ahnswohth Finance secretary ■ - THE IN-SERVICE CO AND THE FEDERAL-AMD MIIITARY-COURTS 'FEBRUARY, 1970 I« One who by reason of religious training and belief is opposed to participation in war in any form is not subject to combat training and service in the armed forces. Department of Defense Directive 1300.6, 1 SSLR 2325 Army: AR 635-20 (Nov. 10, 1969), 1 SSLR 2343; Navy: BUPERSMANÜAL Article 1860120 (July 1, 1969); Air Force: AFR 35-24 (Mar. 25, 1969). 1 SSLR 2347; Marines: MCO 1306.16B (June 18, 1969), 1 SSLR 2353; Army National Guard, Army Reserves: AR 135-25 (Apr. 11, 1969)', 1 SSLR 2333;' Other Reserves: regulations governing active duty personnel. Cf, section 6 (j) of 196.7 draft act, 50 Ü.S.C. App. 456(j). II. Habeas corpus is the appropriate remedy to test the legality of military custody of a serviceman, and a federal court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.'2241• Jones v. Cunningham. 371 U.S. 236 (1963)» III» Jurisdiction, venue, and claims for special judicial relief.. A. District court has jurisdiction in mandamus proceeding against military under 28 UrS.C. I36I. Smith v. Resor, 406 F.2d 141, 1 SSLR 3320 (2d Cir. I969)? Hancock v. Laird. 415 F 2d 234, 2 SSLR 3272 (9th Cir. 1969), B. In certain circumstances, serviceman can judicially challenge denial c-f CO discharge by petitioning for declaratory judgment. Boraan v.. Resor. 302 F. Supp. 1200, 2 SSLR 32?1 (N.D. Cal. I969); see Jarrett v. Resor, 2 SSLR 3272 (N.D. Cal. 1969); Morbeto v. U.S.. 293 P. Supp. 3'3, 2 SSLR 3022 (CD. Cal. 1968). C. District court has jurisdiction to review actions by military authorities which violate military regulations.« Dunmar v. Ailes, 348 F.2d 51 (D.C. Cir, 1965); Stephens v. Smith, 294 P. Supp. 31, 2 SSLR 3022 (E.D. Va. 1968); see Clark v. Brown, 414 F.2d 1159, 2 SSLR 3156 (D.C. Cir. 1969); Smith v, Resor, 406 F„2d 141, 1 SSLR 3320 (2d Cir. 1969)? McAbee v, Martinez, 291 F. Supp. 77 (D. Md. I968). MIDWEST REGION (MCDC): 711 S. Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60605 • (312) 427-3350 WESTERN REGION: 437 Market Street, San Francisco, California 94105 • (415) 397-6917 |
| Type | Text |
| Digital identifier | giEphemera867001 |