InsideGov
Supreme Court · Decisions

Gibson v. United States

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a Jehovah's Witness minister could appeal his classification without first appearing at induction camp.

329 U.S. 338 · No. 23 · 1946 term · Vinson Court

Decided Dec 23, 1946 · argued Jan 2, 1946, reargued Oct 23, 1946

First Amendment · Conscientious objectors

Majority opinion: Wiley Rutledge

The voteMajority

9–09 in the majority, 0 in dissent

No dissent (9–0)

Reversed. Gibson won.

What this ruling means

Reversed: the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, and its own ruling ends the case.

Gibson was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Won” means the Court gave that side the result it asked for.

From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.

Report a correction

Summary

The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.

Gibson v. United States, 329 U.S. 338 (1946), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that a Jehovah's Witness minister could appeal his classification without first appearing at induction camp.

Read the full article on Wikipedia

Data notes

The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.

Report a correction

How the justices voted

Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 1946 term. Filled: the 9 in the majority. Hollow: the 0 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.

More liberalMore conservativeMedianBlackMurphyRutledgeDouglasReedVinsonBurtonFrankfurterR. Jackson

Majority(9)

Dissent(0)

  • None.
Data notes

Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.

Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.

Report a correction

The parties

Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.

Petitioner
GibsonPerson subject to selective service
Respondent
United StatesUnited States
Reached the Court by
Certiorari (the Court chose to hear it)
Data notes

The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.

Report a correction

The law at issue

The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.

Provision
Selective Service, Military Selective Service, or Universal Military Service and Training Acts
Kind of law
Federal Statute
Decided by
Statutory construction
Data notes

The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.

Report a correction

Timeline

What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.

  1. Dec 23, 1946DecidedDecided · Decided 9–0: reversed. Gibson won.
  2. Oct 23, 1946RearguedReargued · The Court heard the case argued a second time.
  3. Jan 2, 1946ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
  4. Not datedTaken upTaken up · The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case (certiorari).
  5. Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit: affirmed.
  6. Not datedBeganBegan · The case began in the South Dakota U.S. District Court.
Data notes

From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.

Report a correction

Other decisions on the same issue

24 other argued cases since 1946 on conscientious objectors, newest first.

  1. Wayte v. United States470 U.S. 598Mar 19, 1985 · 470 U.S. 598First Amendment7–27–2 band
  2. Fein v. Selective Service System Local Board No. 7 of Yonkers, New York, et al.405 U.S. 365Mar 21, 1972 · 405 U.S. 365First Amendment4–36–3 band
  3. Parisi v. Davidson et al.405 U.S. 34Feb 23, 1972 · 405 U.S. 34First Amendment7–0Unanimous band

  4. Clay, aka Ali v. United States403 U.S. 698Jun 28, 1971 · 403 U.S. 698First Amendment8–0Unanimous band

  5. McGee v. United States402 U.S. 479May 17, 1971 · 402 U.S. 479First Amendment8–18–1 band
  6. Ehlert v. United States402 U.S. 99Apr 21, 1971 · 402 U.S. 99First Amendment6–36–3 band
  7. Gillette v. United States401 U.S. 437Mar 8, 1971 · 401 U.S. 437First Amendment8–18–1 band
  8. United States v. Weller401 U.S. 254Feb 24, 1971 · 401 U.S. 254First Amendment8–18–1 band
  9. United States v. Sisson399 U.S. 267Jun 29, 1970 · 399 U.S. 267First Amendment5–36–3 band

  10. Mulloy v. United States398 U.S. 410Jun 15, 1970 · 398 U.S. 410First Amendment8–0Unanimous band
  11. Welsh v. United States398 U.S. 333Jun 15, 1970 · 398 U.S. 333First Amendment5–36–3 band
  12. United States v. Seeger380 U.S. 163Mar 8, 1965 · 380 U.S. 163First Amendment9–0Unanimous band

  13. Gonzales v. United States364 U.S. 59Jun 27, 1960 · 364 U.S. 59First Amendment5–45–4 band

  14. Johnston et al. v. United States351 U.S. 215May 21, 1956 · 351 U.S. 215First Amendment6–36–3 band
  15. Gonzales v. United States348 U.S. 407Mar 14, 1955 · 348 U.S. 407First Amendment5–36–3 band

  16. Simmons v. United States348 U.S. 397Mar 14, 1955 · 348 U.S. 397First Amendment6–27–2 band

  17. Sicurella v. United States348 U.S. 385Mar 14, 1955 · 348 U.S. 385First Amendment6–27–2 band

  18. Witmer v. United States348 U.S. 375Mar 14, 1955 · 348 U.S. 375First Amendment6–27–2 band

  19. Dickinson v. United States346 U.S. 389Nov 30, 1953 · 346 U.S. 389First Amendment6–36–3 band

  20. United States v. Nugent346 U.S. 1Jun 8, 1953 · 346 U.S. 1First Amendment5–36–3 band
  21. Cox v. United States332 U.S. 442Nov 24, 1947 · 332 U.S. 442First Amendment5–45–4 band

  22. Sunal v. Large, Superintendent, Federal Prison Camp332 U.S. 174Jun 23, 1947 · 332 U.S. 174First Amendment6–36–3 band
  23. Eagles, Post Commanding Officer, v. United States ex rel. Horowitz329 U.S. 317Dec 23, 1946 · 329 U.S. 317First Amendment9–0Unanimous band
  24. Eagles, Post Commanding Officer, v. United States ex rel. Samuels329 U.S. 304Dec 23, 1946 · 329 U.S. 304First Amendment9–0Unanimous band
Data notes

Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.

Report a correction

Official record

Read the full opinion on Justia and Wikipedia. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.