Legal Opinion

Ruthenberg v. United States

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided January 14, 1918No. 656PublishedCited by 95 opinions

ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. The case is stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice White

Schue was indicted for having failed to register as required by the Act of Congress of May 18, 1917, c. 15, 40 Stat. 76, known as the Selective Draft Law, and in the same indictment it was charged that Ruthenberg, Wagenknecht and Baker, the plaintiffs in error, “did aid, abet, counsel, command and induce” Schue in failing to register “and procure him to commit the offense involved in his so doing.” Schue pleaded guilty and the other three de-, fendants were tried, found guilty and sentenced. Because of objections raised to the constitutionality of the act this direct writ of error was…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hale v. HenkelSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
  2. Holt v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  3. Spies v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
  4. Agnew v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  5. Frisbie v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by95 opinions

  1. Apodaca v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Frazier v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  3. Shawn Garfield Price v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Hammer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  5. United States v. GottfriedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948

90 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API