[3] Petitioner Clyde Summers could not uphold that constitutional requirement due to his religious beliefs, and the Supreme Court upheld the denial of his license of practice.

[4] Clyde Summers entered the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign at the age of 16, earning a Bachelor of Science in Accounting in 1939 and a Juris Doctor (cum laude) in 1942.

The bar association admitted he was of high moral character and exhibited excellent knowledge of the law, but in January 1943 denied him admission due to his conscientious objector status.

[4] With representation by the American Civil Liberties Union,[10] Summers sued, alleging that the bar association's actions had infringed his First and Fourteenth amendment rights.

The Supreme Court of Illinois held that 1) The courts had no jurisdiction over the issue, and thus no "case or controversy" existed under Article Three of the Constitution; and 2) The bar association had not discriminated against Summers on the basis of his religion but rather on the basis of his ability to uphold the military service section of the Illinois state constitution.

[12] Regarding the "case or controversy" aspect of the issue, Reed concluded that the admission of a lawyer to the bar was "a ministerial act which is performed by virtue of the judicial power, such as the appointment of a clerk or bailiff or the specification of the requirements of eligibility or the course of study for applicants for admission to the bar, rather than a judicial proceeding.

[15] The record in In re Summers was incomplete and the response for petition of certiorari from the Illinois Supreme Court was oddly formed, leaving the issue of a controversy muddied.

Relying on Hamilton v. Regents of the University of California, 293 U.S. 245 (1934), he declared conscientious objection a "grace of Congressional recognition" and noted that the state of Illinois recognized no such rights.

Black bluntly phrased the issue in terms starkly different than the majority's: "It has denied him a license on the ground that his present religious beliefs disqualify him for membership in the legal profession.

[24] Black found the majority's distinction between upholding the Illinois Constitution and discriminating against Summers' religious beliefs "circuitous".

[25] "This feeling was made manifest in Article VI of the Constitution, which provides that 'no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

'"[25] Illinois has the power to draft its citizens, and to punish them for refusing to serve in its militia, Black said, but it does not have the right to assume beforehand that Summers would take the bar association oath in bad faith and fail to fulfill it at some indeterminate time in the future.

[3] Reed also imposed his own theology on the Christian Bible, openly criticizing Summers for misinterpreting its tenets and for practicing (rather than merely reading) it.