Perpich v. Department of Defense
Citations
- 496 U.S. 334
- 110 S. Ct. 2418
- 110 L. Ed. 2d 312
- 1990 U.S. LEXIS 3012
- 58 U.S.L.W. 4750
About this case
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
1990 United States Supreme Court case
Perpich v. Department of Defense, 496 U.S. 334 (1990), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court concerning the Militia Clauses of Article I, Section 8, of the United States Constitution , in which the court held that Congress may authorize members of the National Guard to be ordered to active federal duty for purposes of training outside the United States without either the consent of the governor of the affected state or the declaration of a national emergency . The plaintiff was Rudy Perpich , governor of Minnesota at the time.
In 1986, after governors George Deukmejian of California and Joseph E. Brennan of Maine refused to allow the deployment of their states' National Guard units to Central America for training, Congress passed the Montgomery Amendment, which prohibited state governors from withholding their consent. Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis had also challenged the law, but lost in U.S. District Court in Boston in 1988.[1]
See also
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perpich_v._Department_of_Defense&action=edit§ion=1 "Edit section: See also")
]
References
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perpich_v._Department_of_Defense&action=edit§ion=2 "Edit section: References")
]
- ↑ David Evans (June 12, 1990). "SUPREME COURT CONFIRMS U.S. CONTROL OVER GUARD" . Chicago Tribune.
Further reading
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perpich_v._Department_of_Defense&action=edit§ion=3 "Edit section: Further reading")
]
- Beckman, Norman (1991). "Limiting State Involvement in Foreign Policy: The Governors and the National Guard in Perpich v. Defense" . Publius. 21 (3): 109–123. doi :10.2307/3330517 . JSTOR 3330517 .
- Bovarnick, Jeff (1991). "Perpich v. United States Department of Defense: Who's in Charge of the National Guard?". New England Law Review. 26: 453. ISSN 0028-4823 .
External links
[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perpich_v._Department_of_Defense&action=edit§ion=4 "Edit section: External links")
]
- Text of Perpich v. Department of Defense, 496 U.S. 334 (1990) is available from: CourtListener Google Scholar Internet Archive (docket files) Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perpich_v._Department_of_Defense&oldid=1351343277 "
Hidden categories:
Search
Search
Perpich v. Department of Defense
Add languages Add topic
Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “The unchallenged validity of the dual enlistment system means that the members of the National Guard of Minnesota who are ordered into federal service with the National Guard of the United States lose their status as members of the state militia during their period of active duty.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Stevens
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.