Skip to main content
SCOTUS Case

Johnson v. Robison

Primary source

Background below is sourced from Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0). We link back to the source for attribution; edits made by Wikipedia editors after our last scrape may not appear here.

Background

Johnson v. Robison

Johnson v. Robison, 415 U.S. 361 (1974), was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court . The court held that the Veterans' Administrations ' allocation of greater educational benefits to combat veterans than conscientious objectors was consistent with the United States Constitution . Robison, a conscientious objector , argued that such unequal benefits violated his 5th Amendment right to Equal Protection and his First Amendment right to free exercise of religion . The court rejected both arguments.

Opinion of the Court

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Johnson_v._Robison&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: Opinion of the Court")

The court reasoned that a rational basis existed to give combat veterans better benefits than those who objected for religious reasons: namely, encouraging people to participate in the armed forces as soldiers. The court reasoned that the increased disruption and longer commitment for soldiers justified disparate allocation of benefits. As to free exercise, the court held that the withholding of benefits had only an incidental burden, if any, on religious exercise, that that burden was not intended, and that it was justified by the substantial government interest in raising an army.

The Court also held that 38 USC section 211(a) does not preclude constitutional challenges to law administered by the Veteran's Administration.

External links

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Johnson_v._Robison&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: External links")

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Johnson_v._Robison&oldid=1351338479 "

Read the full Wikipedia article

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.