Over at National Public Radio, Nina Totenberg is doing a series of reports based on the release of late Supreme Court Justice, Harry Blackmun. Over at the SCOTUS Blog, I found this excerpt that reports that the Court was set to rule against Muhammad Ali in his draft case:
"Cassius Clay, who had taken the muslim name Mohammed Ali, had been refused conscientious objector status. He appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, where the justices initially voted to uphold his conviction. Justice John Harlan was assigned to write the opinion, but again, in the course of writing it, he decided his original conclusion was wrong. "I am now convinced that the conviction should be reversed," he wrote to his colleagues. In the end, the Court issued an unsigned opinion, without dissent, holding the conviction invalid because of the Justice Department's handling of the case. Although a hearing officer had ruled that Ali should be granted conscientious objector status, based on sincere religious views, the Justice Department had recommended to the draft board that the finding simply be ignored."
Remember, this is the same man who was honored (and rightly so) with carrying the Olympic Torch to the cauldron at the 1996 Atlanta Games. How different might our perceptions of Ali be today had the Court ruled against him?
