https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...nly-registration-unconstitutional/2968872002/
According to this judge, men and women are equally capable of performing combat roles, so it's unconstitutional to require only men to register for selective service. I haven't checked for responses from major feminist outlets yet, but I can only imagine they'll be thrilled that equality has been achieved. They've been claiming that women can perform combat roles for years now, and this judge fully agreed with them.
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 like federal employment and student loans. Women cannot register for Selective Service.
The ruling comes as an 11-member commission is studying the future of the draft, including whether women should be included or whether there should continue to be draft registration at all.
The National Commission on Military, National and Public Service released an interim report last month giving no hints on where it would come down on those issues. But commission chairman Joe Heck told USA TODAY, "I don’t think we will remain with the status quo."
More: Should women be required to register for the military draft?
The government had argued that the court should delay its ruling until that commission makes its recommendations. But Miller said Congress has been debating the issue since 1980, and the commission's final report won't come until next year. And because the commission is advisory, there's no guarantee that Congress will act, he said.
Judge 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.
But the ruling came in the form of a declaratory judgment and not an injunction, meaning that the court didn't specifically order the government how to change Selective Service to make it constitutional.
"Yes, to some extent this is symbolic, but it does have some real-world impact," said Marc Angelucci, the lawyer for the men challenging the draft. "Either they need to get rid of the draft registration, or they need to require women to do the same thing that men do."
According to this judge, men and women are equally capable of performing combat roles, so it's unconstitutional to require only men to register for selective service. I haven't checked for responses from major feminist outlets yet, but I can only imagine they'll be thrilled that equality has been achieved. They've been claiming that women can perform combat roles for years now, and this judge fully agreed with them.
