Santiago v. Rumsfeld, et al., United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, May 13, 2005 [upholding the US military's power to issue emergency stop-loss orders to keep soldiers on active duty beyond the time set in their service contracts]. Excerpt:
We do not minimize the disruption, hardship and risk that extension of his enlistment is causing Santiago to endure. We also accept the fact that his claim not to be subject to the stop-loss order has been brought in complete good faith. For the reasons we have set forth, however, we conclude that the application of the stop-loss order did not breach his enlistment contract or deprive him of due process of law. We also conclude that it was authorized by 10 U.S.C. § 12305(a).
Read the full text of the opinion here [PDF]. Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here.