Introduced: Sponsor: Rep. Peter DeFazio [D-OR4]
This bill was referred to the House Committee on Armed Services which will consider it before sending it to the House floor for consideration.
For those who don't know about the Selective Service Act in the United States; here's a quote from SSS.gov >If you are a man ages 18 through 25 and living in the U.S., then you must register with Selective Service. It’s the law. According to law, a man must register with Selective Service within 30 days of his 18th birthday. Selective Service will accept late registrations but not after a man has reached age 26. You may be denied benefits or a job if you have not registered.
On Their FAQ >What is Selective Service registration? Registration is a way our government keeps a list of names of men from which to draw in case of a national emergency requiring rapid expansion of our Armed Forces. By registering all young men, the Selective Service ensures that a future draft will be fair and equitable.
AND >What is the penalty for not registering? Failure to register is a violation of the Military Selective Service Act. Conviction for such a violation may result in imprisonment for up to five years and/or a fine of not more than $250,000.
Troops regularly visit America high schools, often with presentations and trinkets, all in the hopes of getting people to register and sign up for the Army.
I think the whole thing is fundamentally wrong:
- You're being sexist and singling out young men to take away to war, girls get off entirely
You've got Troops coming into schools to try and recruit children, which preys on youthful naivety and that feeling of invincibility inherent to childrenYou're promising these kids who are in high school worrying about their future that if you sign up for the Army they'll cover all your educational needs. Putting your body on the line is a "career investment", so they advertise.- You're severely punishing anyone who defies this idea of being drafted into the military. It's a fundamental breach of our freedoms and rights, and is wrong.
EDIT: The struck out sections I've reconsidered as more of a personal moral dilemma than a direct knock against the draft and Selective Service. Those go back to a more fundamental belief that the military is wrong because of being a pacifist, so the focus of the CMV should really be on the merits of Selective Service in and of itself, and not the morals of using youth in this way.
This system almost requires every man and boy in the country to commit themselves to military service, to join
... keep reading on reddit ➡Repeal of the Military Selective Service Act
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REPEAL OF THE MILITARY SELECTIVE SERVICE ACT.
(a) Repeal.
—The Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.) is repealed.
(b) Transfers In Connection With Repeal.
—Notwithstanding the proviso in section 10(a)(4) of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 460(a)(4)), the Office of Selective Service Records shall not be reestablished upon the repeal of the Act. The assets, contracts, property, and records held by the Selective Service System, and the unexpended balances of any appropriations available to the Selective Service System, shall be transferred to the Administrator of General Services upon the repeal of the Act. The Director of the Office of Personnel Management shall assist officers and employees of the Selective Service System to transfer to other positions in the executive branch.
(c) Termination Of Sanctions For Persons Previously Subject To Registration.
—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person may not be denied a right, privilege, benefit, or employment position under Federal law on the grounds that the person failed to present himself for and submit to registration under section 3 of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 453), before the repeal of that Act by subsection (a).
(d) Conforming Amendments.—
(1) TITLE 5.—Title 5, United States Code, is amended as follows:
(A) By striking section 3328.
(B) In the table of sections at the beginning of chapter 33, by striking the item relating to section 3328.
(C) In section 5102(b), by striking “, including positions” and all that follows through “those positions”.
(D) In section 5315, by striking the paragraph relating to the Director of Selective Service.
(2) TITLE 8.—The Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) is amended as follows:
(A) In section 101(a)(19) (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(19))—
-(i) by striking “section 3(a) of the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, as amended (54 Stat. 885; 55 Stat. 844), or under section 4(a) of the Selective Service Act of 1948, as amended (62 Stat. 605; 65 Stat. 76) or under”; and
-(ii) by striking “sections or”.
(B) In section 237(a)(2)(D)(iii) (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)(D)(iii)), by striking “any provision of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.) or”.
(C) In
... keep reading on reddit ➡To the Honorable Justices of this Court, the petitioner, /u/MoralLesson, respectfully submits this petition for a writ of certiorari to review the constitutionality of The Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.). Furthermore, the petitioner petitions the Honorable Court for immediate injunctive relief as to the enforcement of this law while its constitutionality is being considered by the Court.
The following questions have been raised for review by the Court:
1 -- Whether the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.) can survive strict scrutiny or whether it is unconstitutional under the 28th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, which reads:
> Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.
Considering the Military Selective Service Act discriminates on the basis of sex by only requiring males and not females to register for Selective Service, and considering that females now serve in active combat roles in the military.
2 -- Whether Arver v. United States, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), is still good law, and whether or not the 13th Amendment's prohibition on involuntary servitude and the 1st Amendment's free speech guarantees prohibit required registration systems not ordered by a court, especially those aimed at potential conscription.
3 -- Whether registration for Selective Service should be constituted as a form of unconstitutional compelled speech as prohibited in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943), for registration with Selective Service suggests agreement with war, conscription, and other governmental policies. Indeed, such a registration system is an attack on core political speech.
4 -- Whether it is constitutional to suspend numerous federal benefits, including access to federal subsidized student loans, for those who fail to register for Selective Service as said loans could be received prior to the requirement to enroll in Selective Service (i.e. 17 year-olds can and do receive the benefits) and suspended without adequate procedural safeguards, as this Court ruled unconstitutional in both Cleveland Bd. of Ed. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 541 (1985), and In re: The Federal Accountability Internal Revue Act, 15-04 (2015).
Hi all, So long story short my fafsa survey offered to let me sign up for the draft. I’ve since learned that all people assigned male at birth must register. No matter how far you transition. First off, is my research wrong? Second, I was just starting to feel proud of myself and feel like I’m not a guy even though that’s how I was born and I feel like that knowledge has somehow taken all of that away from me. Legally, I will always be male. No matter how much I like wearing dresses and makeup and no matter how far I transition. How do I stop feeling hopeless and frustrated about this? How can I go back to thinking that gender is something I can just change?
I, sitting by designation, issue the following Memorandum Opinion and Order regarding the civil contempt proceedings from the ongoing case In re: Selective Service Act.
No. 21-05: IN RE: SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM -Contempt Proceedings-
Comes contempt proceedings in No. 21-05, arising from a challenge to Selective Service System of the United States.
Abstract
Associate Justice Bsddc issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order, sitting by designation.
-
I hereby ADJUDGE AND DECREE that PRESIDENT ADITH_MUSG is GUILTY of CONTEMPT before this Court.
-
He may PURGE this determination by either (1) submitting appropriate briefing defending the Selective Service Act, or (2) appointing counsel in this matter who shall then be subject to this Court’s contempt power.
-
Having ADJUDGED AND DECREED that PRESIDENT ADITH_MUSG is GUILTY of CONTEMPT before this Court, I hereby ORDER terms of coercive civil remedies as described fully in my Order, including:
-
Monitoring by GPS ankle bracelet by the US Marshals;
-
Civil confinement in the White House (more fully elaborated in my Order); and
-
The President must, while making public appearances in the White House, wear a red letter "C."
Full Memorandum Opinion and Order
So Ordered,
/u/Bsddc,
Associate Justice
I was digging through some paperwork for tax documents and found my selective service card. I then jumped on the “draft” wormhole on the internet about its history and how it ended in 1973 however the selective service act exists but I still had to register. I was wondering since we live in a progressive era in time should we include women into the selective service or should we end it altogether?
Formed in 1917, the Selective Service System is an independent Federal agency that keeps records of individuals registered for a potential military draft.
Failure to register used to result in penalties, however these have not been prosecuted in many years (from Source 1):
> The last prosecution for non-registration was in January 1986. In interviews published in U.S. News & World Report in May 2016, current and former Selective Service System officials said that in 1988, the Department of Justice and Selective Service agreed to suspend any further prosecutions of non-registrants. No law since 1980 has required anyone to possess, carry, or show a draft card, and routine checks requiring identification virtually never include a request for a draft card.
In practice, the last draft was decades ago and enrolling in the military is voluntary today, however the Selective Service has several administrative roles not pertaining to the military. Some of these administrative roles incentivize enrollment (from Source 1):
> Registration with Selective Service is also required for various federal programs and benefits, including the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA), student loans and Pell Grants, job training, federal employment, and naturalization.
In 1981, the Supreme Court in Rostker v. Goldberg upheld the constitutionality of the all-male draft. This decision was partly determined based on the limited roles women could have in the military at the time.
On Friday, a Federal judge ruled that women have sufficient access to combat roles in the military and that Rostker v. Goldberg no longer applies.
The judge's ruling (PDF warning) was a Declaratory Judgement, and probably doesn't have great implications right now (from Source 3):
> "Yes, to some extent this is symbolic, but it does have some real-world impact," said Marc Angelucci, the lawyer for the men challenging the draft. "Either they need to get rid of the draft registration, or they need to require women to do the same thing that men do."
I have a couple
... keep reading on reddit ➡Does anyone here know how the SSA affects trans people, specifically mtfs? And if it doesnt apply to transgender people, could some tucute lie about having a neopronoun, or being trans, just to get out of being put in the SSA?
^- ^Live ^tweets ^from ^1943 ^(@RealTimeWWII) ^| ^January ^3, ^2021
These boards would, in the event of a war and subsequent draft, decide cases where draftees are requesting deferments for any number of reasons. You can check it out here: https://www.sss.gov/About/Agency-Structure/Local-Boards
You can serve for 20 years and it requires laughably minimal effort. I've been doing it for 10 years now and have never even met the other board members.
Introduced: Sponsor: Rep. Gwen Moore [D-WI4]
This bill was referred to the House Committee on Armed Services which will consider it before sending it to the House floor for consideration.
Introduced: Sponsor: Rep. Mike Coffman [R-CO6]
This bill was referred to the House Committee on Armed Services which will consider it before sending it to the House floor for consideration.
Rep. Mike Coffman [R-CO6] is a member of the committee.
