Yahr v. Resor, 14423.
| Decision Date | 27 August 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 14423.,14423. |
| Citation | 431 F.2d 690 |
| Parties | Richard A. YAHR et al., Appellants, v. Stanley R. RESOR, Secretary of the Army, et al., Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
Leonard B. Boudin, David Rosenberg and Dorian Bowman, New York City (Rabinowitz, Boudin & Standard, Laughlin McDonald, Chapel Hill, N. C., Howard L. Moore, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., and Samuel S. Mitchell, Raleigh, N. C., on the brief), for appellants.
J. C. Proctor, Asst. U. S. Atty. (Warren H. Coolidge, U. S. Atty. for the Eastern District of North Carolina, on the brief), for appellees.
Before BOREMAN and BUTZNER, Circuit Judges, and WIDENER, District Judge.
Appellants are servicemen stationed at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. During their off duty hours they publish a newspaper, "Bragg Briefs," which has been distributed to servicemen off the base. Pursuant to Army and Fort Bragg regulations, they submitted timely applications for permission to distribute "Bragg Briefs" at various public areas on the military reservation. The Commanding General denied each application on the grounds that the publications constituted a clear danger to the loyalty, discipline and morale of the military personnel under his command.* They now appeal from the refusal to grant a preliminary injunction against interfering with the distribution of the newspaper on the base.
The district court found that the evidence failed to show either a probability of plaintiffs' ultimate success on the merits or a clear denial of plaintiffs' constitutional rights. In the present posture of the case, we need only consider whether the action of the district court was a clear abuse of discretion. Meiselman v. Paramount Film Distributing Corp., 180 F.2d 94 (4th Cir. 1950).
As a basic proposition, servicemen are entitled to the protections of the Bill of Rights, except where military exigencies, such as security and discipline, by necessary implication restrict their applicability. United States v. Jacoby, 11 USCMA 428 (1960). Within the military establishment, and under the regulations in question, the commanding officer has primary responsibility for determining the impact of the newspaper on the men in his command. Clearly the district judge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to grant the preliminary injunction. In so holding, of course, we express no opinion on the merits of the case.
Constitutional questions should be decided only when unavoidable,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Schlesinger
...Corporation (N.D.W.Va.1973), 363 F.Supp. 1061, 1063, and Yahr v. Resor (E.D.N.C.1972), 339 F.Supp. 964, 967, aff'd on other grounds, 4 Cir., 431 F.2d 690 (all to the contrary, denying subject-matter jurisdiction under APA). 52 519 F.2d at 939. 53 412 F.Supp. at 174-5. 54 It was this very un......
-
Burnett v. Tolson
...are areas of Fort Bragg "completely open and unrestricted." United States v. Bradley, 418 F.2d 688, 689 (4th Cir. 1969); Yahr v. Resor, 431 F.2d 690 (4th Cir. 1970). The allegations of the Complaint, therefore, establish a clear right in Burnett and his class to enter the public areas of Fo......
-
Cortright v. Resor, 70 C 909.
...and association); Locks v. Laird, 300 F.Supp. 915 (N.D.Calif. 1969) (freedom of speech; wearing uniform at meeting); Yahr v. Resor, 431 F.2d 690 (4th Cir. 1970) (freedom of speech); In Re Brown v. Brown, 3 S.S. L.R. 3404 (E.D.Mich., Sept. 30, 1970) (freedom of speech). Cf. Wolff v. Selectiv......
-
Cortright v. Resor
...393 U.S. 233, 89 S.Ct. 414, 21 L.Ed.2d 402 (1968). The military, it would seem, is subject to some of the Constitution. Yahr v. Resor, 431 F.2d 690 (4th Cir. 1970); Dash v. Commanding General, 307 F. Supp. 849 (D.S.C.1969), aff'd, 429 F.2d 427 (4th Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 981, 91......
-
Recent Proposals to Change the Traditional Military Retirement System to Mirror the Federal Service Retirement: Eroding Discipline and Civil-military Relations Through Potentially Unlawful and Certainly Questionable Acts
...discipline, but that the value of the speech challenged was over $10,000 and therefore a justiciable matter). But see Yahr v. Resor, 431 F.2d 690 (4th Cir. 69. 408 U.S. 564 (1972). 70. Bd. of Regents of State Colls. v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 577 (1972). 71. Roth, 408 U.S. at 577. 72. 397 U.S. ......