Syndicate
Special Thanks To...
The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
With women in combat roles, a federal court rules the male-only draft unconstitutional
Submitted by Mastodon on Sun, 2019-02-24 16:58
Article here. Excerpt:
'A federal judge in Texas has declared that the all-male military draft is unconstitutional, ruling that "the time has passed" for a debate on whether women belong in the military.
The decision deals the biggest legal blow to the Selective Service System since the Supreme Court upheld the draft in 1981. In Rostker v. Goldberg, the court ruled that the male-only draft was "fully justified" because women were ineligible for combat roles.
But U.S. District Judge Gray Miller ruled late Friday that while historical restrictions on women serving in combat "may have justified past discrimination," men and women are now equally able to fight. In 2015, the Pentagon lifted all restrictions for women in military service.
The case was brought by the National Coalition For Men, a men's rights group, and two men who argued the all-male draft was unfair.
Men who fail to register with the Selective Service System at their 18th birthday can be denied public benefits such as federal employment and student loans. Women cannot register for Selective Service.
...
Miller said Congress has never fully examined the issue of whether men are physically better able to serve than women. In fact, he noted in a footnote, "the average woman could conceivably be better suited physically for some of today's combat positions than the average man, depending on which skills the position required. Combat roles no longer uniformly require sheer size or muscle."
Quoting the Supreme Court's ruling overturning bans on same-sex marriage, Miller ruled that restrictions based on gender "must substantially serve an important governmental interest today."
The judge denied the government's request for a stay of the ruling, and Justice Department officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment.'
- Log in to post comments
Comments
MAJOR victory!
Guys, this is huge. Not to be passed up in the stream of stories and news blurbs. It is virtually unprecedented and may in fact be. I know the only thing close to it we have is that Israeli women *may* serve in the armed forces if they so choose but can serve in non-military service as an alternative while Israeli men must serve in the military.
Does anyone know of any country where a higher court has ruled that women must be subject to the same dangers associated with coerced military service as men?
I dare SCOTUS to overturn this ruling.
Hooray for NCFM for this one!
Yep a major victory for equality
We'll soon find out if women want equality of responsibility along with equality of rights.
I know where I'm betting my money. :)
They'll take it to SCOTUS....
... and SCOTUS will have to uphold it. The entire basis for the no-females decision rests with combat role eligibility and always has. Now that that is vacated, it's over.
If for some reason SCOTUS finds some other reason to exclude women from the draft, it'll be so unbelievably ham-fisted as to warrant its own case.
Major decision
This is a land mark event in gender law. Congrats.
Women will be required to shoulder equal responsibility in at least one field of lawful obligations. Just mind boggling that the draft for national service would be the first.
Will be watching closely to see if the military take a similar stance to women's draft as the judiciary take to women's sentencing in criminal law.
Given its driven by constitutionally enforcable rights, and the US is one of very few countries with those kinds of consitutional guarantees, its unlikely this can be repeated elsewhere.
Doesn't really mean anything
until the government is actually made to comply.
Next step
The judge was just declaring the con'lality. Next step will be to sue for relief. Then another judge will decide on the relief. By not specifying relief the judge leaves the matter of how to implement the relief to the SSS. That is a gift he is giving the SSS, ie, fix it yourself before some other judge tells you just how to fix it.
It also makes sense to let the appeal go through to SCOTUS where they will likely affirm it. Ie, it's a waste of time to outline relief when for sure the gov't will sue to enjoin until the appeal is heard. So the judge was just saving on ink by not specifying relief.
But because the decision is grounds for suing for relief he clearly has kicked the ball back into the SSS's court. Their next move is definitely going to appeal the decision.
Stay tuned.
this will be great
for defense contractors. I can see entirely new ways to spend $$ to accommodate the privileged class. some ideas? oh yeah.
1. fox holes will come to have a new meaning. they will need to be prefabbed of course. no battlefield will be suitable unless it comes fully prepared w/ all the amenities. million $$ holes if u will.
2. long marches in the bush w/ full packs? not likely. might break a heel on a dirty old march. and where's a gal to get a pedicure out in a jungle?
3. field equipment will have to be totally rethunk and redesigned. I mean, where does one put one's mirror and makeup bag in a backpack? u can omit the shovel as well. I have NEVER seen a woman dig a hole, ever. and those helmets get mighty heavy after a couple miles, not to mention no beauty parlors anywhere to be seen.
4. attack and defeat the enemy? u.t. will have some very interesting videos once that order is given.
5. prisoner exchanges? well, for once, I think 'male privilege' will be a real thing. if some serious bad guys capture 10 trooper guys and 10 trooper gals, and only 10 get released... u do the math.
these are just a few of the 'opportunities' contractors and commanders will discover when they try to put average feminist jane on the battlefield. there are women who are suitable for some roles in combat, but they are rare as alimony payments to x-husbands. u know they exist, just never seen one. someday, somewhere, somehow, somebody will have to admit men and women were made for diff roles in this world.