Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Selective Service Sys. Vs. Mpirg

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jul 05, 1984

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

63 entries 8 linked 55 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Lovett US Supreme Court · Jun 03, 1946
  2. Flemming Vs. Nestor US Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1960
  3. Minnesota Vs. Murphy US Supreme Court · Feb 22, 1984
  4. Gardner Vs. Broderick US Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1968
  5. Cummings Vs. Missouri US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1867
  6. Counselman Vs. Hitchcock US Supreme Court · Jan 11, 1892
  7. Lefkowitz Vs. Turley US Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1973
  8. Goldberg Vs. Kelly US Supreme Court · Mar 23, 1970
  9. U.S. 841 (1984) U.S. Supreme Court Selective Service Sys. v. MPIRG
    Search
  10. U.S. 841 (1984) Selective Service System v. Minnesota
    Search
  11. Nixon v. Administrator
    Search
  12. f)'s requirements are not irreversible, but can be met readily by either timely or late registration. Cummings v. Missouri
    Search
  13. to register, and have not been disqualified for financial aid for asserting a constitutional privilege. Lefkowitz v. Turley
    Search
  14. Doe v. Selective
    Search
  15. Court's June 16 order pending the timely docketing and final disposition of this appeal. Selective Service System v. Doe
    Search
  16. United States v. O'Brien
    Search
  17. United States v. Brown
    Search
  18. Communist Party of United States v. Subversive
    Search
  19. for punishment, id. at 367 U. S. 87 , the Act may be an attainder. See Cummings v. Missouri
    Search
  20. affiliation with the Confederacy prevented attorneys from taking the oath without perjuring themselves. See Cummings v. Missouri
    Search
  21. The District Court failed to take account of this legislative purpose. See Heckler v. Edwards
    Search
  22. f) give adequate deference to the views of the Secretary of Education, who had helped to draft the statute. Miller v. Youakim
    Search
  23. CSC v. Letter
    Search
  24. which a student who wants public assistance can correct. Communist Party of United States v. Subversive
    Search
  25. our holdings recognize that the severity of a sanction is not determinative of its character as punishment. Flemming v. Nestor
    Search
  26. n. 9 (1960). That burdens are placed on citizens by federal authority does not make those burdens punishment. Nixon v. Administrator
    Search
  27. to retribution for past events, but may involve deprivations inflicted to deter future misconduct. United States v. Brown
    Search
  28. of pains and penalties. The Constitution proscribes these lesser penalties as well as those imposing death. Cummings v. Missouri
    Search
  29. Section 12(f) imposes none of the burdens historically associated with punishment. As this Court held in Flemming v. Nestor
    Search
  30. Shillitani v. United
    Search
  31. Service the failure to comply timely with the registration law. Appellees contend that, under our holding in Lefkowitz v. Turley
    Search
  32. United States v. Brown
    Search
  33. Appellees argue that the underpinnings of Flemming have been removed by Goldberg v. Kelly
    Search
  34. U. S. 254 , 397 U. S. 262 (1970), and Mathews v. Eldridge
    Search
  35. are entitled to little, if any, weight, since they were made by opponents of the legislation. Schwegmann Bros. v. Calvert
    Search
  36. The dissent reads Marchetti v. United
    Search
  37. States, 390 U. S. 39 (1968), and Grosso v. United
    Search
  38. secondary educations, the statute must be sustained if rationally related to a legitimate Government interest. Harris v. McRae
    Search
  39. f) is punitive in its purpose and effect, there is no bill of attainder. Nixon v. Administrator
    Search
  40. f) is a form of punishment, appellees cite Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall. 333 (1867), Cummings v. Missouri
    Search
  41. Wall. 277 (1867), and United States v. Lovett
    Search
  42. Boyd v. United
    Search
  43. self-incrimination extends to every means of government information Page 468 U. S. 867 gathering. Lefkowitz v. Turley
    Search
  44. Murphy v. Waterfront
    Search
  45. the Government with two crucial links in the chain of evidence necessary to prosecute him criminally. Cf. Marchetti v. United
    Search
  46. Brown v. Walker
    Search
  47. in a way that deprives appellees of the freedom to refrain from self-incrimination through late registration. Garrity v. New
    Search
  48. U.S. Supreme Court Selective Service Sys. v. MPIRG
    Search
  49. Selective Service System v. Minnesota
    Search
  50. Selective Service System v. Doe
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial