William O. Douglas

“ A defendant is entitled to such an inspection, subject to protective order by the court to mask the names or by other means prevent public disclosure of the content of the files, so that without violating the confidentiality of the files he may properly determine for himself whether there is a proper foundation for the board's apparent deviation from the order of call suggested by the Form 102, see Alderman v. ”

“ Notes
↑ Reg. § 1631.7 (a) (3) provides:↑ Id., n. 1.↑ One case holds that a local board's failure to observe the order of call regulations does not prevent a conviction for either refusal to report for civilian work, refusal to submit to induction or refusal to report for induction. That case, Schutz v. United States, 422 F.2d 991 (CA5) , stands apart from the great weight of authority.↑ Reg. § 1606.32.↑ Reg. § 1606.32 (c) .↑ This regulation puts in Class I-D a registrant who 'enlists or accepts appointment before attaining the age of 26 years' in the Reserves. ”