Muhammad Ali v. Breathitt

• Citation: 268 F. Supp. 63
• Decision Date: 29 March 1967
• Docket Number: Civ. A. No. 5621.
• Parties: MUHAMMAD ALI, also known as Cassius M. Clay, Jr., and Erastus X. Williams on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Edward T. BREATHITT, Jr., Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Kentucky

268 F. Supp. 63

MUHAMMAD ALI, also known as Cassius M. Clay, Jr., and Erastus X. Williams on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Edward T. BREATHITT, Jr., Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky et al., Defendants.

Civ. A. No. 5621.

United States District Court W. D. Kentucky, Louisville Division.

March 29, 1967.

Hayden C. Covington, New York City, Ernest Woodward, II, Louisville, Ky., for plaintiffs.

Ernest W. Rivers, U. S. Atty., Western Dist. of Kentucky, Louisville, Ky., Robert Matthews, Atty. Gen. of Kentucky, Frankfort, Ky., for defendants.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

JAMES F. GORDON, District Judge.

This matter came on for hearing on March 29, 1967, upon plaintiffs' application for a three-judge court and plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. The Court having heard oral argument, and having examined the pleadings, affidavits, exhibits and memoranda of law filed by the parties, and being fully advised, hereby makes its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as follows:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. This is an action for declaratory and related injunctive relief brought by "Muhammad Ali, also known as Cassius M. Clay, Jr." and another upon behalf of themselves and "all others similarly situated." Plaintiffs seek a declaration that Section 10(b) (3) of the Universal Military Training and Service Act, 50 App. U.S.C. § 460(b) (3), is unconstitutional on its face and as applied because of a "systematic exclusion" of Negroes from membership on local boards and appeal boards in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Plaintiffs seek both preliminary and permanent mandatory injunctions directing the Governor of Kentucky to nominate Negroes for appointment to local draft boards and appeal boards in Kentucky in proportion to their ratio to the population within the jurisdiction of the respective boards. They also seek a preliminary and permanent injunction restraining all draft boards in the Commonwealth of Kentucky from performing their functions and operating as a part of the Selective Service System "until validly reconstituted" by the appointment of Negroes, and restraining any further classification and induction of Negroes until such reconstitution has been accomplished.

Plaintiffs have applied for the convocation of a three-judge court under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2282, 2284, and the plaintiff Clay seeks an injunction restraining his induction into service pending this action.

2. Plaintiff Cassius M. Clay, Jr. is a selective service registrant with Local Board No. 47, Jefferson County, Louisville, Kentucky. On February 28, 1966, he submitted to his local board SSS 150, Special Form for Conscientious Objector, in which he requested a I-O classification. The local board denied this exemption and classified him 1-A. Since that time plaintiff Clay has pursued various administrative appeals through the Selective Service System, contending that he should either be classified as a conscientious objector (I-O) or as a "regular minister of religion" (IV-D).

3. On February 24, 1967, the National Director of Selective Service appealed Clay's 1-A classification to the National Selective Service Appeal Board. That Board, which consists of three members—one of whom is a Negro—, reviewed plaintiff's entire file de novo and classified Clay 1-A by a unanimous vote on March 3, 1967.

4. Upon a return of plaintiff Clay's file to Local Board No. 47, an order to report for induction was directed to him instructing him to report for induction on April 11, 1967. At his request his place of induction has been transferred to Houston, Texas where he has been ordered to report for induction on April 28, 1967. There has been no showing that any other plaintiff has been...