The challengers behind the initial lawsuit had hoped that the Supreme Court would overrule the policy, claiming that it had been made at a time when women were prohibited from combat roles and stating that it violates the Fifth Amendment right to equal protection.
However, the Supreme Court maintained its policy of “longstanding deference to Congress on matters of national defense and military affairs,” arguing that it is yet to be seen if “Congress will end gender-based registration under the Military Selective Service Act.”
I am actually OK with this ruling. It's not the Court's job to legislate. This ruling sends the issue back where it belongs.
>
The challengers behind the initial lawsuit had hoped that the Supreme Court would overrule the policy, claiming that it had been made at a time when women were prohibited from combat roles and stating that it violates the Fifth Amendment right to equal protection.
>
However, the Supreme Court maintained its policy of “longstanding deference to Congress on matters of national defense and military affairs,” arguing that it is yet to be seen if “Congress will end gender-based registration under the Military Selective Service Act.”
I am actually OK with this ruling. It's not the Court's job to legislate. This ruling sends the issue back where it belongs.
(post is archived)