Court Case

Korematsu v. United States -- 1944

Background:

In the state of war and the ongoing fear of espionage and sabotage, the Commanding General of the Western Defense ordered American citizens of Japanese descent to be removed from West Coast military areas. After May 9, 1942 all Americans of Japanese descent were to be removed from these West Coast military areas. An American citizen remained in his San Leandro, California home despite the Civilian Exclusion Oder No. 34. The petitioner was convicted in federal court and appealed his case. In Nineteen-forty two, the Supreme Court viewed his case.

Majority Opinion:

Mr. Justice Black delivered the opinion of the court. He stated, “It should be noted, to begin with, that all legal restrictions which curtail the civil rights of a single racial group are immediately suspect. That is not to say that all such restrictions are unconstitutional.” The Supreme Court justified the fact that a race was single handedly sought out and punished for the acts of war Japan committed. The removal from designated areas was a precaution to prevent acts of sabotage and espionage. In a sense, the Supreme Court ruled that those who did not comply with the removal were in fact of those who were committing the crimes because they refused to show their loyalty to the United States by readily and willingly able to move to the camps. The question brought to the table was whether or not Congress had too much power and justification to discriminate against a nationality. Mr. Justice Black also stated, “We cannot say that the war-making branches of the Government did not have ground for believing that, in a critical hour, such persons could not readily be isolated and separately dealt with, and constituted a menace to the national defense and safety which demanded that prompt and adequate measures be taken to guard against it.” The ruling of Korematsu v. United States largely took the nations protection in the verdict based upon a number of Japanese Americans’ allegiance to Japan. The case was limited to evacuation of military areas because Korematsu committed that crime. Evacuation was seen as an act of prevention from another attack rather than an act of discrimination. To protect the nation from another act of attack and to prevent harm happening from within the country, the majority ruling was in favor of Congress rather than the petitioners. 

My opinion on how this case decision affects society:

 The United States of America is home to many nationalities but as citizens we stand together as a whole. United States citizens shouldn’t be persecuted because the actions of war their home country committed. I agree, in a vulnerable state of war we need to be aware of acts of espionage and sabotage but the actions need to be justified not based on nationality alone. It is too far fetched to look at a nationality as a whole and label them as a threat to the United States. So, in my opinion, the Supreme Court should not have ruled against the petitioner, Korematsu. Today, even though the United States isn’t officially in war the Supreme Court ruling does not protect immigrants and descendants of Arabs from segregation and removal from their homes. People of Arabic decent are not protected from the eviction from their home and the replaced to camps. It is sad, but the views of people do change in times of war. I know in every case there are traitors, we live in an imperfect world where war and strife will always exist but that does not give others the right to discipline the innocent because of the guilty. It is important to understand that even in times of anger and the overwhelming feeling to correct the wrong of a country by punishing the people of that nationality has no justification. The Supreme Court ruling to me also iterates that all people of the same nationality or ethnicity are the same. It does not destroy stereotypes and discrimination in fact, it justifies them.