---
title: "Military Expert Witnesses Testify about Women’s Contributions to the Military"
meta:
  "og:description": "Even military expert witnesses who testified in favor of registering women uniformly opposed the actual drafting of women"
  "og:title": "Military Expert Witnesses Testify about Women’s Contributions to the Military"
  author: "Expert Witness Profiler"
  description: "Even military expert witnesses who testified in favor of registering women uniformly opposed the actual drafting of women"
---

# Military Expert Witnesses Testify about Women’s Contributions to the Military

Posted on May 26, 2024 by Expert Witness Profiler

Memorial Day, originally known as Decoration Day, is observed on May 30. It is a federal holiday in the United States for honoring and mourning the U.S. military personnel who died while serving in the United States Armed Forces.

Lets revisit significant moments of the United States military history on this occasion, such as when the Supreme Court upheld the male-only requirement for selective service registration.

## **Facts:**

Congress is given the power under the U.S. Constitution to raise and support armies, to provide and maintain a navy, and to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces. Congress enacted the Military Selective Service Act (MSSA).

Now, section 3 of the Military Selective Service Act empowered the President, by proclamation, to require the registration of “every male citizen” and male resident aliens between the ages of 18 and 26 in order to facilitate eventual conscription under the Act. Although registration for the draft was discontinued in 1975, President Jimmy Carter determined in early 1980 that it was necessary to reactivate the registration process and recommended that funds be transferred from the Department of Defense to the Selective Service System for this purpose. He also recommended that Congress amend the Act to permit the registration and conscription of women as well as men.

Congress agreed that is was necessary to reactivate the registration process; however, it allocated only those funds necessary to register males and, although it considered the question at great length, it declined to amend the Act to permit the registration of women. Thereafter, the President ordered the registration of specified groups of young men pursuant to 3 of the Act. Ultimately ruling in a case which had been brought nearly ten years earlier in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by several men subject to registration for the draft and subsequent induction into the armed services, a three-judge Federal District Court held that the Act’s gender-based discrimination violated the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.

On direct appeal, the United States Supreme Court reversed the same.

## **Discussion by the Court**

The Court held that Congress acted well within its constitutional authority when it authorized the registration of men, and not women, under the MSSA. Congress specifically recognized and endorsed the exclusion of women from combat in exempting women from registration. The existence of the combat restrictions clearly indicated the basis for Congress’s decision to exempt women from registration because the purpose of registration was to prepare for a draft of combat troops. Men and women, because of the combat restrictions on women, were not similarly situated for purposes of a draft or registration for a draft.

By “considerations of equity,” the military experts acknowledged that female conscripts can perform as well as male conscripts  in certain positions, and that there is therefore no reason why one group should be totally excluded from registration and a draft.

However, even military experts, who consistently testified that women have made significant contributions to the effectiveness of the military, remained opposed to the actual drafting of women.

It was suggested that in the scenario of a 650,000-draft, approximately 80,000 female inductees could be accommodated by the military. These 80,000 women could fill non-combat positions, freeing men to go to the front. In the first place, assuming that a small number of women could be drafted for noncombat roles, Congress simply did not consider it worth the added burdens of including women in draft and registration plans. Congress also concluded that whatever the need for women for noncombat roles during mobilization, whether 80,000 or less, it could be met by volunteers.

## **Held**

The United States Supreme Court concluded that Congress acted well within its constitutional authority when it authorized the registration of men, and not women, under the Military Selective Service Act.

## **Key Takeaway:**

Congress never disagreed with the judgment of the military experts that women have made significant contributions to the effectiveness of the military. On the contrary, Congress repeatedly praised the performance of female members of the Armed Forces, and even approved efforts by the Armed Services to expand their role. But Congress was entitled, in the exercise of its constitutional powers, to focus on the question of military need rather than “equity.”

## **Case Details:**

---

## **You Might Also Like**

![Intellectual Property Expert&#39;s Opinion on Misappropriation Excluded](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/blog-pic-640X480-2026-03-13T205412.117.jpg) [**Intellectual Property Expert’s Opinion on Misappropriation Excluded**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/military-expert-witnesses-testify-about-womens-contributions-to-the-military/intellectual-property-experts-opinion-on-misappropriation-excluded)![Automotive Industry Expert&#39;s Testimony on Pricing Practices Excluded](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/blog-pic-640X480-2026-03-13T191143.335.jpg) [**Automotive Industry Expert’s Testimony on Pricing Practices Excluded**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/military-expert-witnesses-testify-about-womens-contributions-to-the-military/automotive-industry-experts-testimony-on-pricing-practices-excluded)![Consumer Credit Expert Allowed to Opine on Mixed Files](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/blog-pic-640X480-2026-03-13T160600.039.jpg) [**Consumer Credit Expert Allowed to Opine on Mixed Files**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/military-expert-witnesses-testify-about-womens-contributions-to-the-military/consumer-credit-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-mixed-files)![Appraisal Expert&#39;s Testimony on Deceptiveness Excluded](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/blog-pic-640X480-2026-03-11T194055.299.jpg) [**Appraisal Expert’s Testimony on Deceptiveness Excluded**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/military-expert-witnesses-testify-about-womens-contributions-to-the-military/appraisal-experts-testimony-on-deceptiveness-excluded)![Psychology Expert Allowed to Opine on EMDR Therapy](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/blog-pic-640X480-2026-03-11T153456.164.jpg) [**Psychology Expert Allowed to Opine on EMDR Therapy**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/military-expert-witnesses-testify-about-womens-contributions-to-the-military/psychology-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-emdr-therapy)