Judge rules men-only military draft unconstitutional in court win for San Diego men's group

Good for the goose good for the gander !

Assumptions:
1) If the draft were to be activated, we are already in a shooting match, or are anticipating a shooting match with high casualty rates.
2) The powers that be do not think we will be able to meet manpower requirements to ensure victory with an all-volunteer force.
3) The draft would be “gender neutral” and represent the American population. (51% female, 49% male)
4) MOS assignment would be “gender neutral” and roughly 51% of those assigned to any given MOS (including combat arms) would be female.
5) A driving factor in opening combat arms MOS’s to women was equality of opportunity.
6) A restraining factor to opening combat arms MOS’s to women was concerns about combat effectiveness. (Does anyone wish to argue that physicality is not germane to combat effectiveness?)

We can argue about it all day long, but a survey across the potential draftee pool would show a higher level of physicality (specifically Physical Strength, Endurance under a load, and speed under a load) amongst men in comparison to women. There would obviously be some outliers.
Equality of opportunity is a compelling and overriding government interest.
Combat effectiveness is a compelling and overriding government interest.

Which compelling and overriding government interest takes precedence?

If RP admin choses to delete this comment AGAIN, please have the courtesy of explaining why this is not a legitimate question deserving of discussion on the web site?

I am not sure what the draft law on the books right now accomplishes anyway. As a school counselor to ESOL students I had young women who were furious that they were not allowed to register and young men convinced the Selective Service would give their information to some other government agency (likely Homeland Security) and then send them away. Even some of the American kids had problems registering and getting confirmed.