United States v. Seeger

This article is about a pacifism-related case that involved Daniel Seeger. For the First Amendment– and HUAC-related case Seeger v. United States, see Pete Seeger.

United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 (1965), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that the exemption from the military draft for conscientious objectors could be reserved not only for those professing conformity with the moral directives of a supreme being but also for those whose views on war derived from a "sincere and meaningful belief which occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel to that filled by the God of those" who had routinely gotten the exemption.

United States v. Seeger
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 16–17, 1964 Decided March 8, 1965
Full case name	United States v. Daniel Andrew Seeger; United States v. Arno Sascha Jakobson; Forest Britt Peter v. United States
Citations	380 U.S. 163 (more) 85 S. Ct. 850; 13 L. Ed. 2d 733; 1965 U.S. LEXIS 1666
Case history
Prior	United States v. Seeger, 216 F. Supp. 516 (S.D.N.Y. 1963); reversed, 326 F.2d 846 (2d Cir. 1964); cert. granted, 377 U.S. 922 (1964). United States v. Jakobson, 325 F.2d 409 (2d Cir. 1963); cert. granted, 377 U.S. 922 (1964). Peter v. United States, 324 F.2d 173 (9th Cir. 1963); cert. granted, 377 U.S. 922 (1964).
Court membership
Chief Justice Earl Warren Associate Justices Hugo Black · William O. Douglas Tom C. Clark · John M. Harlan II William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart Byron White · Arthur Goldberg
Case opinions
Majority	Clark, joined by Warren, Black, Harlan, Brennan, Stewart, White, Goldberg
Concurrence	Douglas

The Court reasoned that "both morals and sound policy require that the state should not violate the conscience of the individual" and that "liberty of conscience has a moral and social value which makes it worthy of preservation at the hands of the state." Additionally, that if this principle is violated to preserve the "life" of the state that it puts into question whether the state will lose its "life" as a result.

The case resolved, on diverse but related grounds, three cases, each involving conviction for failure to accept induction into the armed forces on the part of someone who sought conscientious-objector status without "belong[ing] to an orthodox religious sect". The accused, whose cases were otherwise unrelated, were Arno Sascha Jakobson, Forest Britt Peter, and Daniel Andrew Seeger; it was Seeger's case that gave its name to the multi-case decision. Archibald Cox, then Solicitor General, argued for the United States in every case.

See also

• List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 380
• Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333.

Further reading

• In stillness there is fullness: a peacemaker's harvest: essays and reflections in honor of Daniel A. Seeger's four decades of Quaker service; edited by Peter Bien and Chuck Fager, Belfonte, Pennsylvania, Kimo Press, ISBN 978-0-945177-17-3. This festschrift includes:
  • "Excerpts from and comments on a Thesis called 'The challenge to the Supreme Court of the case United States v. Seeger'" by Margery W. Rubin
  • "The Seeger decision" by L. William Yolton
  • "The Supreme Court decision"
• Alley, Robert S. (1999). The Constitution & Religion: Leading Supreme Court Cases on Church and State. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. pp. 454–465. ISBN 1-57392-703-1.

External links

• Works related to United States v. Seeger at Wikisource
• Text of United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 (1965) is available from: Justia  Library of Congress  Oyez (oral argument audio)