Rostker v. Goldberg

SCOTUSCase
Litigants=Rostker v. Goldberg
ArgueDate=March 24
ArgueYear=1981
DecideDate=June 25
DecideYear=1981
FullName= Bernard Rostker, Director of Selective Service et al. v. Robert L. Goldberg et al.
USVol=453
USPage=57
Citation=
Prior=
Subsequent=
Holding=The Act's registration provisions do not violate the Fifth Amendment. Congress acted well within its constitutional authority to raise and regulate armies and navies when it authorized the registration of men and not women.
SCOTUS=1975-1981
Majority=Rehnquist
JoinMajority=Burger, Stewart, Blackmun, Powell, Stevens
Dissent=White
JoinDissent=Brennan
Dissent2=Marshall
JoinDissent2=Brennan
LawsApplied=*Military Selective Service Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 451 "et seq." (1976 ed. and Supp. III)
*U.S. Const. Amend. V.
Superseded=
Overruled=

"Rostker v. Goldberg", 453 U.S. 57 (1981),ref|citation was a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding that the U.S. Congress could require the Selective Service system to adopt a policy of requiring only men to register for the draft. In a written opinion by Justice William Rehnquist and supported by a 6-3 vote, the Court held, " [t] he existence of the combat restrictions clearly indicates the basis for Congress' decision to exempt women from registration. The purpose of registration was to prepare for a draft of combat troops. Since women are excluded from combat, Congress concluded that they would not be needed in the event of a draft, and therefore decided not to register them." Implicit in the "obiter dicta" of the ruling was to hold valid the statutory restrictions on gender discrimination in assigning combat roles.

External links

* [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=453&page=57 453 U.S. 57] Full text of the opinion courtesy of Findlaw.com.
* [http://www.american.edu/dgolash/rostker.htm Rostker v. Goldberg Opinion From American University]
* [http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/336/ Summary of case from OYEZ]