Constitutional Law - Due Process - Conscientious Objectors, as Alternate Servicemen, Are Entitled to the Same Veterans Educational Benefits Received by Regular Servicemen - Robison v. Johnson, 352 F. Supp.848 (D. Mass. 1973)
Loading...
Authors
Ronald, Lauren M.
Issue Date
1973
Volume
6
Issue
Type
Journal Article
Language
Keywords
Alternative Title
Abstract
FIRST PARAGRAPH(S)|William Robison was classified as a conscientious objector by the local selective service board in Fairfax, Virginia. Pursuant to the War and National Defense Act, he was ordered to perform alternate service at a hospital in Boston, Massachusetts. After serving two years, Robison applied for educational assistance under the Veterans Readjustment Benefits Act. The Veterans Administration informed Robison that he was ineligible for benefits, since alternate service was not "active duty", Robison subsequently requested the United States District Court in Massachusetts to issue declaratory judgments that: (1) the veterans educational benefits legislation violates the United States Constitution; and (2) plaintiff and the members of his class were eligible to receive educational benefits. Robison moved for summary judgment, contending that the exclusion of alternate servicemen was an invidious discrimination constituting both a denial of due process under the fifth amendment and a violation of the Free Exercise Clause of the first amendment...
Description
Citation
6 Creighton L. Rev. 393 (1972-1973)
Publisher
Creighton University School of Law