United States vs. O’Brien
In the 1960s, the United States was fighting the Vietnam War. The war was
controversial, and many Americans protested against the Selective Service System. The
system drafted young men into the Armed Forces of the United States (Patrick). In 1965
Congress amended the Selective Service Act, making it a crime for anyone to destroy or
mutilate a draft registration card (Patrick.). On March 31, 1966, David O’Brien burned
his draft card during an antiwar demonstration at the entrance to the South Boston
courthouse. O’Brien was indicted, tried and convicted for violating the Selective Service
Act and Federal Laws (“United States”). The case reached the United States Supreme
Court on January 24, 1968, and was decided on May 27, 1968. The United States vs.
O’Brien has influenced many other Supreme Court cases. They include the Cohen v.
California, Texas v. Johnson and the Gulf of Tonkin.
The registration certificate specifies the name of the registrant, the date of
registration, and the number and address of the local board with which he is registered. It
includes the date and place of the registrant's birth, his residence at registration, his
physical description, his signature, and his Selective Service number. The Selective
Service number itself indicates his State of registration, his local board, his year of birth,
and his chronological position in the local board's classification record. The classification
certificate shows the registrant's name, Selective Service number, signature, and
eligibility classification. It specifies whether he was so classified by his local board, an
appeal board, or the President. It contains the address of his local board and the date the
certificate was mailed. The central issue of the case concerns the interpretation of the 1st
Amendment David O’Brien’s claim that he publicly burned his draft card to express his
opposition to the Vietnam War. He burned it to influence others to adopt his anti-war
beliefs (“Supreme”) His “symbolic speech” was in his opinion, permissible because of
his 1st amendment right to free speech (Patrick). Several agents of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) witnessed the event. Immediately after the burning, the crowd began
attacking O’Brien and his companions. An FBI agent ushered O’Brien to safety inside
the courthouse. He was advised of his right to counsel and to silence. O’Brien stated to
FBI agents that he had burned his registration certificate because of his beliefs, and he
knew he was violating federal law. He showed them the charred remains of his
certificate, and the FBI photographed them (“United States”).
When a male reaches the age of 18, he is required by the Universal Military
Training and Service Act to register with a local draft board. He is assigned a Selective
Service number, and within five days he is issued a registration certificate (SSS Form No.
2) (“Supreme Court”). The registrant is assigned a classification denoting his eligibility
for induction, and "as soon as practicable" thereafter he is issued a Notice of
Classification (“Supreme Court” ) Both the registration and classification certificates are
small white cards, approximately 2 by 3 inches (See Appendix A).
The court upheld the 1965 law of the Selective Service Act and rejected David
O’Brien’s claims that it violated his right to free speech (Patrick). Chief Justice Earl
Warren discussed the First Amendment, which says "Congress shall make no law
limiting the freedom of speech." Justice Warren said the freedom of speech did not give
O'Brien the right to burn his draft card. Warren explained that only pure speech gets full
protection under the First Amendment. By contrast, O'Brien's protest involved both
"speech" and "conduct." The speech part was whatever O'Brien meant to say in protest
against the Vietnam War. The conduct part was burning the draft card. Warren said the
federal government can limit the "conduct" part of speech if it satisfies a two part test.
First, it must have a substantial interest in limiting the speech. Second, it must interfere
with the "speech" as little as necessary (end notes). The 7-to-1 majority, speaking through
Chief Justice Earl Warren, established a test to determine whether governmental
regulation involving symbolic speech was justified. The formula examines whether the
regulation is unrelated to content and narrowly tailored to achieve the government's
interest. "We think it clear," wrote Warren," that a government regulation is sufficiently
justified if it is within the constitutional power of the Government; if it furthers an
important or substantial governmental interest; if the governmental interest is unrelated to
the suppression of free expression; and if the incidental restriction on alleged First
Amendment freedoms is not greater than is essential to the furtherance of that
interest."(Case Decision)
Also, a big controversy was three-time world heavyweight boxing champion
Muhammad Ali protesting the Vietnam War. Muhammad Ali was a conscientious
objector. A conscientious objector is someone who is opposed to war in any form, and
bases the claim on religious training and beliefs, and total opposition to war. Muhammad
Ali was Muslim and refused to enter into the army in 1967. Ali was convicted of draft
evasion; the World Boxing Association stripped him of his titles. But in 1970 the
Supreme Court overturned the conviction. The impact of United States v. O’Brien was
very great. In 1970 At Kent State University students protested the antiwar beliefs,
National Guard opened fire on unarmed students killing four and wounding nine( Protest
Kent State.). Throughout the country there were many protests. In May, 1970 Jackson
State students were protesting these issues as. Four Kent State students -- Alison Krause,
Sandra Scheuer, Jeffrey Glenn Miller and William K. Schroeder -- were killed by Ohio
National Guardsmen. According to reports, the riot began around 9:30 p.m., May 14,
when rumors were spread that Fayette, Mississippi mayor Charles Evers (brother of slain
Civil Rights activist Medgar Evers) and his wife had been shot and killed. Upon hearing
this rumor, a small group of students rioted. ( Protest Kent State.) That night, several
white motorists had called the Jackson Police Department to complain that a group of
blacks threw rocks at them as they passed along the stretch of Lynch Street that bisected
the campus. The rock throwing was later attributed by witnesses to a group of nonstudents. The rioting students set several fires and overturned a dump truck that had been
left on campus overnight at a sewer line construction site. Jackson firefighters dispatched
to the blaze met a hostile crowd that harangued them as they worked to contain the fire.
Fearing for their safety, the firemen requested police back-up (Jackson State)
The Supreme Court will continue to hear cases that involve the use of prior
precedents. David O’Brien was sentenced and convicted to six years of maximum prison
as a youth offender status. This case has been extended to include expression of wearing
black arm bands and burning the American flag.
Appendix A
Draft Card
Works Cited
Government. "Facts Of the Case." Supreme Court. Web. 20 Jan. 2010.
<http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1967/1967_232>.
Harrison, Maureen, and Steve Gilbert. Landmark Desisions Of the U.S. N/A: Excellent,
1994.
"Jackson State." Jackson State. Jackson State University, 4 May 1999. Web. 21 Jan.
2010.
<http://www.may41970.com/Jackson%20State/jackson_state_may_1970.htm>.
"O'Brien's Charges." Http://supreme.justia.com/us/391/367/. N/A. Web. 19 Jan. 2010.
<http://supreme.justia.com/us/391/367/>.
Patrick, John J. "United States v. O'Brien." SIRS.com. 2000. Web. 6 Jan. 2010.
<http://www.sirs.com>.
Yanak, Ted, and Pam Comelison. "The Champ." SIRS. Houghton Mifflin, 1 Dec. 1993.
Web. 6 Jan. 2010. <http://www.SIRS.com>.
Yanak, Ted, and Pam Comelison. "Kent State Incident." SIRS. Houghton Mifflin, 1 Dec.
1993. Web. 6 Jan. 2010. <http://www.SIRS.com>.