32 C.F.R. § 1627.1
Who may volunteer
Any registrant who has attained the age of 17 years, who has not attained the age of 26 years, and who has not completed his active duty obligation under the Military Selective Service Act, when inductions are authorized, may volunteer for induction into the Armed Forces unless he;
(a) Is classified in Class 4-F or is eligible for Class 4-F; or
(b) Has been found temporarily unacceptable with reexamination believed justified (RBJ) and the period of time specified for his return for examination has not been terminated and the basis for his temporary rejection continues to exist; or
(c) Is an alien who has not resided in the United States for a period of at least one year; or
(d) Has not attained the age of 18 years and does not have the consent of his parent or guardian for his induction.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1955–1973 · leading case: Fein v. Selective Serv. Sys. Local Bd. No. 7 of Yonkers, 405 U.S. 365 (1972).
Fein v. Selective Serv. Sys. Local Bd. No. 7 of Yonkers, 405 U.S. 365 (1972). “Accordingly, he wrote the National Director of Selective Service in July and asked that the Director appeal on his behalf under 32 CFR § 1627.1 (a). Fein's letter to the Director was detailed.”
United States v. David Arthur Gearey, 368 F.2d 144 (2d Cir. 1966). “In certain cases the decision of the Appeal Board may be reviewed by the President, 32 C.F.R. § 1627.1 . 8 . In 1942, 2 years after the Selective Service Training Act became law, the President promulgated § 626.”
Cassius Marsellus Clay, Jr. v. United States, 397 F.2d 901 (5th Cir. 1968). “(See 32 C. F.R. § 1627.1 for the authority of the National Director to do so.”
United States v. Ray Nevin Stetter, Jr., 445 F.2d 472 (5th Cir. 1971). “The regulations governing appeals beyond the Appeal Board are set forth at 32 C.F.R. §§ 1627.1 -.8. 16 . Tennyson, The Charge of the Light Brigade, Stanza 2 (1854).”
United States v. Thomas J. N. Bellmer, 404 F.2d 132 (3rd Cir. 1968). “See 32 C.F.R. § 1627.1 (a) (1967). Defendant’s further request for an appeal to the President by the National Director of Selective Service is secondary to the problem before us and therefore requires no discussion.”
The United States of Am. v. Irving Talmadge Greene, 220 F.2d 792 (7th Cir. 1955). “See: 32 C.F.R. § 1627.1 , et seq. Selective Service System means just that.”
United States v. Melvin Harvey Tobias, 447 F.2d 227 (3rd Cir. 1971). “The state director or national director may appeal to the National Selective Service Appeal Board from any determinations of the state appeal board, 32 C.F.R. § 1627.1 . 4 . The Military Selective Service Act of 1967, like the present regulation, requires only that “each member…”
Fein v. Selective Serv. Sys. Local Bd. No. 7, 430 F.2d 376 (2d Cir. 1970). “32 C.F.R. § 1627.1 (a) (1948). Meanwhile, on October 31, 1968, the state director wrote to Fein stating that in his opinion Fein did not qualify as a conscientious objector and that his decision to appeal the local board’s 1-0 classification was based on information in Fein’s…”
Fein v. Selective Serv. Sys. Local Bd. No. 7, 430 F.2d 376 (2d Cir. 1970). “32 C.F.R. 1627.1(a) (1948). Meanwhile, on October 31, 1968, the state director wrote to Fein stating that in his opinion Fein did not qualify as a conscientious objector and that his decision to appeal the local board's I-O classification was based on information in Fein's…”
Strople v. Local Bd. No. 60, 330 F. Supp. 187 (E.D. Pa. 1971). “The State Director of Selective Service, under 32 CFR § 1627.1 , is required, before forwarding the registrant’s file to the Director of Selective Service, to place a written statement of his reasons for appealing in the registrant’s file.”
United States v. Theodore Douglas Dooley, 471 F.2d 570 (8th Cir. 1973). “61, or that the appeals agent could have told him that the State Director could have appealed the sole surviving son claim to the President, pursuant to 32 C.F.R. § 1627.1 . Assuming that all of these procedures were open to Dooley, and that either or both the appeals agent or…”
United States v. Chalker, 337 F. Supp. 928 (M.D. Fla. 1972). “Ill Whether the Local Board Improperly Failed to Advise the Defendant of the Appellate Procedure Authorized Under 32 C.F.R. § 1627.1 When the Appeal Board Affirmed the Local Board’s Decision Without a Dissenting Vote.”
— 32 C.F.R. § 1627.1(a) — 1 case
Fein v. Selective Serv. Sys. Local Bd. No. 7, 430 F.2d 376 (2d Cir. 1970). “32 C.F.R. 1627.1(a) (1948). Meanwhile, on October 31, 1968, the state director wrote to Fein stating that in his opinion Fein did not qualify as a conscientious objector and that his decision to appeal the local board's I-O classification was based on information in Fein's…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.