Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Michael Schlesinger v. Melvin Laird. No. A-603
Citations: 409 U.S. 1056; 93 S. Ct. 548; 34 L. Ed. 2d 508; 1972 U.S. LEXIS 288Docket: A-603
Court: Supreme Court of the United States; December 11, 1972; Federal Supreme Court; Federal Appellate Court
Application for a stay presented by Michael Schlesinger, a lieutenant in the United States Army Reserves, has been denied by the Supreme Court. Schlesinger seeks a stay against an order requiring him to report for active duty training, arguing he is entitled to a medical discharge due to disqualifying medical conditions identified by three physicians. Despite these findings, the Surgeon General determined Schlesinger was fit for active duty based on his discretion under Army Regulation 40-501, citing a lack of sufficient severity in his medical issues. Schlesinger filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, contesting the Surgeon General's decision as an abuse of discretion lacking factual basis. While his case was pending, he was ordered to active duty, and the District Court subsequently granted summary judgment for the Government, asserting that the Surgeon General's actions were not arbitrary or capricious. Schlesinger's appeal is currently before the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, which also denied his request to stay the active duty order. Justice Douglas dissents, arguing that the process afforded to Schlesinger lacked adequate procedural due process, as the District Court did not adequately examine the basis for the Surgeon General's decision. He emphasizes the need for transparency in administrative actions that significantly restrict personal liberty, referencing established legal principles that require agencies to disclose the rationale behind their decisions. Douglas contends that the lack of a clear basis for the Surgeon General's ruling warrants the granting of the stay requested by Schlesinger.