Korematsu v US
Facts:
During
the World War II, on May 19, 1942, United States President Franklin Roosevelt
issued an executive order which authorized military commanders to determine
areas from which persons should evacuate from. This was the Executive Order
9066. In line with this said order, a military commander issued an order that
all persons who were of Japanese descent should leave their homes which were
located on the West Coast, after which they were to report to so called “assembly
centers” which were internment camps. This order was deemed to be applicable to
all persons of Japanese descent, regardless of whether or not they were
American citizens.
The
petitioner Korematsu, an American citizen of Japanese descent failed to comply
with the said order. He knowingly violated the said order by staying in
California. He was thus convicted of violating a federal law which penalized
the failure to comply with military orders such as that mentioned. It is interesting to note that in the said
case, the loyalty of Korematsu to the United States was unquestioned, and it
was found that there was no reason to question his loyalty to the United States
Government.
The
Circuit Court of Appeals convicted Korematsu for the aforementioned offenses,
and the United States Supreme Court later on granted the petition for
certiorari.
Issue:
The
issue is whether or not the order of the Executive as well as Congress to
exclude persons of Japanese ancestry from the West Coast is within their
respective powers.
Rule:
Such
restriction and orders which restrict the exercise of the civil rights of a
particular group must always be regarded with the utmost and strict scrutiny.
However, there are instances wherein such rights must give way to public
necessity which justify their curtailment.
Application:
It
was ruled by the Court that in this specific case, such curtailment of the
civil rights of the persons of Japanese descent was justified. Justice Black,
in particular, noted that in times of war, such as when the order was executed,
the government is given the necessary power to be able to effectively protect
its people. In this specific case, the country was threatened by hostile forces
and the government was left no choice but to wield its power with a heavier
hand. Espionage was a very real threat to the safety of the country, and thus,
steps to prevent such were reasonably necessary for the protection of United
States citizens. As the danger to its people was great, the government also had
to enforce orders that were in line with the protection of its people. In this
specific case, the civil rights of Fred Korematsu were outweighed by the pressing
need for the protection of the people. Korematsu was not ordered to leave the
West Coast because his loyalty was questioned or because of hostility towards
him or his racial affinity. He was excluded from the area because of the
dangers of war.
It
should be noted that the case in question is a special one, being one which
involves the time of World War II. In no other case would this jurisprudence be
applicable during ordinary times, so to speak.
This
case in fact established the so called “strict scrutiny” standard of review in
such cases. This rule was set forth in order to help determine whether or not
such orders are reasonably necessary and whether or not the necessity of the
implementation of the law is well balanced against the civil rights of those
people who are affected by it. Later on, this “strict scrutiny” doctrine was
used to decide cases which involved various laws and orders that were deemed
invalid due to the fact that they were heavily influenced by discrimination,
racial discrimination in particular.
This is a sample Korematsu v. US Case Brief from smartessaywriters.com – the leading provider of reliable and affordable essay writing services and research paper writing services in the United States and the United Kingdom
No comments:
Post a Comment