◆ SpookStack

é . ae i ABY P-ED35S D2 FT C2ACaj:2 8" <+New Yorr Times, Fov. 3, 1957, vp. 1-- in + directive dsted October 26, 1957, General Levis B, Hershey, Selective Service System Director, instructed the nation's 4100 locsl dreft dozrds es follows: 1 - illegrl ectivity wh'ck interferes wita recruiting er causes refusal of y in the militer: forces could not by eny stretch of the incz tion be construe? as being in suorort of the notion al interesti...Demonstrati-ns, waen they become illegsl, heve proéucsd -nd will continue to produce much evidence thrt reletes to the bests for clrseteficetinn....4 loc-1 bord, noon receint of this information, wey reopen the clessific-tion.. andes. declare the resistr-nt to be ¢ delinquent. (H.Y. Times, For. 9, t &s the Tir revorter covering the interview of Fov, 7 stxtes, "the cecicion wouls resvli in the drsfting of studen or other young persons wae hold deferments but norticintte in enti- denonstre tions adjudged to interfere vith selective service operation,” ostensibly under the.st-tute tht crovides venslties for "any person who shall Imovinzly interfere....in «ny wey by force or violence...." with the operetion cf the draft systen. : . SUCH USI OF PSE SELSCTIVS .S.VICE SYS?EN I5 UNCONSTITUTIONAL. On October 15, 1965 University of Michigon -students protested the Vietnom wor by st-ginge sit-in “t the local Selective Service board at Ann Arbor, Michigan. Ten of these students.lost their TI-&§ deferments end wre recl-ssified I-# by their locel boards -t the behest of Generzl Hershey. Two students envperled this violeétion of their rights of free sneech by suing the Selective Service System. In the case of Peter Yolff end Rich-rd Short vs. Selective Se vice Loc=l 3o02rds #16 and #65, the United States Second Court of 4pyeets ruled on Jenuary 30, 1957 rs follows: 1. “Locel dreft bo-rd &14 not have authority to decide that Selective service recistrant was ‘delimuent' beceuse of perticipatton in demonstr-tion.... a 3B. Loc-l srlective service board did not heve function of punlshing infividusl registr-nts for p-rticip2tine in demonstration.... . . 6. «seCompl-int...thet registr-nt's jonstitutional rights of speech and assembly. weve infringed by draft board's re- elessificatiin....becouse of p-rticination in demonstration... would t-ke precedence over volicy of court of nonintervention in affairs of selective service. . 12. Ordin-rily, selective service registrent must wait until he recieves induction order, end h-s either obeyed it, or is prosecuted for refusing to obey it... 16. Mere thre-t of imnceition of unconstitutional senctions will cause immedicte irrevarsble injury to free exercise of rights as fragile -nd sensitive to suvoression es freedom of speech and essembly... ce .