Smitty, yes.

Also, to offer a view on the original question:



Many notions of legality are ambiguous, of course. Nowhere in the Constitution does it require one to answer to the draft. There are only implications of legality, which are set forth by various resolutions, acts, amendments, etc., however, one has the right to challenge, and offer their own interpretation of those implications.

As an rejoinder to that point, I'll note the insufficiencies of the Internal Revenue Code. No where does it specifically and unequivocally require one to pay their income taxes...no where. But, try not paying, and see if the ol' "boots and guns" do not immediately replace the institution of "law and logic." However, you absolutely can challenge the ruling. Many have done so, and succeeded. No where in writing, will the court be able to positively and undeniably prove that you've broken the law by not paying your income tax.

Point being: one has the right to challenge both being drafted and the system that created the draft. Vietnam draftees who could afford high-dollar lawyers to plead their case of ineligibility could technically delay the draft process long enough to avoid the war. Of course, I assume that others were even luckier, and the courts outright approved their request based on a variety of factors including, but certainly not limited to, educational and occupational status - which I don't think could be classified as socio-economic discrimination, could it? B/c that would be a federal case that could explode.