Back to Blog
Human japanese trial vs full version5/11/2023 ![]() Some argued that the statements by Sotomayor and Roberts were opinions not central to the travel ban case so would not be binding in future court decisions. On Tuesday, legal scholars differed on whether the justices actually overturned the Korematsu decision. But the high court decision has continued to stand. In 1983, a federal court in San Francisco overturned Korematsu’s conviction after researchers found documents proving government misconduct in his case - federal attorneys deliberately suppressed evidence of Japanese American innocence in arguing for the incarceration. He agreed to become a test case challenging the constitutionality of the orders but the high court upheld them on the grounds of military necessity. Sotomayor’s reference to Korematsu “affords this court the opportunity to make express what is already obvious: Korematsu was gravely wrong the day it was decided, has been overruled in the court of history, and - to be clear - ‘has no place in law under the Constitution,’” Roberts wrote, quoting a dissent written to the 1944 ruling by former Justice Robert Jackson.įred Korematsu, an Oakland native whose Japanese immigrant parents ran a floral nursery, was 23 when he was arrested in San Leandro for defying the mass incarceration orders issued after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor in 1941. But it is wholly inapt to liken that morally repugnant order” to a policy “denying certain foreign nationals the privilege of admission.” citizens to concentration camps, solely and explicitly on the basis of race, is objectively unlawful and outside the scope of the presidential authority. “Whatever rhetorical advantage the dissent may see in doing so, Korematsu has nothing to do with this case,” he said. That didn’t sit well with Chief Justice John G. In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor cited “stark parallels” between the travel ban decision and the Korematsu ruling. That’s because the court rejected the prior Korematsu ruling in a decision that upheld the Trump administration’s ban on visitors from five Muslim-majority nations - Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen - as well as North Korea and some government officials from Venezuela. To me what the Supreme Court did was substitute one injustice for another.” “I feel the court all over again dishonored my father and what he stood for. Supreme Court would overturn its infamous 1944 decision upholding the mass incarceration of her father, Fred, and 120,000 others of Japanese descent during World War II.īut when the high court condemned that decision Tuesday, Korematsu was not overjoyed. For decades, Karen Korematsu has hoped and prayed that someday the U.S.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |