Dickinson v. United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Dickinson v. United States | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supreme Court of the United States | ||||||||||
|
||||||||||
| Holding | ||||||||||
| Court membership | ||||||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||||||
Dickinson v. United States, 346 U.S. 389 (1953),[1] was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held there was no basis for denying petitioner's claim to ministerial exemption from military service, and his conviction for refusing to submit to his local board's induction order was reversed.
Contents |
[edit] Introduction
| Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] Prior history
| Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] Facts of the case
| Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] Decision of the Court
Justice Clark delivered the opinion of the Court.
The Court ruled that classification as minister is not available to all members of a sect notwithstanding doctrine that all are ministers; but part-time secular work does not, without more, disqualify member from satisfying the ministerial exemption.
[edit] Majority decision
| Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] Minority opinions
[edit] Effects of the decision
| Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] Critical response
| Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] Subsequent history
| Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] References
- ^ 346 U.S. 389 Full text of the opinion courtesy of Findlaw.com.

