Korematsu And The Civil Liberties Act Of 1988

Korematsu v. United States: Fred Korematsu’s Case On February 19, 1942, during World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt passed the Executive Order 9066. This authorized the U.S. military to move thousands of Japanese citizens from places deemed crucial to national safety and possibly defenseless against infiltration. The military immediately used this power to issue a ban on all people, “immigrant and non- immigrant,” with Japanese lineage. Following this ban, captivity camps were set up to hold Japanese Americans, extending along the entire West Coast.

Korematsu v. United States was a controversial landmark decision ruling by the United States Supreme court. Fred Korematsu was a Japanese-American living in California, he was ordered to refuse to leave his city after the Japanese internment camp. After the World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued the Executive Order 9066 and  Congressional decree gave the military power to exclude citizens of Japanese descent from areas deemed critical to national defense and may be vulnerable to espionage. On May 3, 1942, Fred Korematsu stayed in California and violated the US Army Civilian Executive Order No. 34. This supreme court case has an importance of interpreting the constitution and the different perspective of interpreting the constitution based on a person’s own political background and beliefs.

When trying to support my argument about legal doctrines being shaped by race during this time period the case of Korematsu v. United States has to be talked about. At the beginning of WWII President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, giving the U.S. military the right to ban thousands of Japanese-American citizens from areas thought of as critical to homeland security. Thus, setting up ‘interment camps’ to hold the Japanese for the duration of the war. Mr. Korematsu did not follow suit and decided to stay home in the state of California. The upholding of Korematsu’s conviction by the Supreme Court showed not only how threatened the country felt about Japanese immigrants but also put into question how equal everyone truly was in America.

18 U.S.C.A. s 97a; Executive Order February 19, 1942, No. 9066; U.S.C.A.Const. arts. 1, 2. Hirabayashi v. United States, 320 U.S. 81, 63 S. Ct. 1375, 87 L. Ed. 1774 (1943). This is similar reasoning as in the case of

The Constitution limits power on Government through Checks and Balances. In a 1944 case between Korematsu and the United States during World War II, a presidential executive order gave the military authority to exclude citizens of Japanese descent from areas deemed critical to national defense and potentially vulnerable to espionage. Along with this they also arrested Japanese Americans and forced them into internment camps. Korematsu however, a US citizen from ancestry descent, refused to leave his home in San Leandro, California. Korematsu appealed, and in 1944 the case reached the Supreme Court.

At different times in U.S history the government has disputed about certain actions that limited civil liberties. Some include the Executive Order 9066 which relocated Japanese Americans in 1942 and the USA Patriot Act in 2001. These acts impacted the United States majorly. They both occurred after a tragic event took place and the government wanted to protect themselves, the people, and the country. The Executive Order 9066 was passed after the bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese in 1941.

After the attack on Pearl Harbor the United States was in an uproar. Americans were now in fear of Japanese spies and they placed their suspicions on ordinary Japanese American citizens. President Roosevelt was swayed into ordering Executive Order 9066. President Roosevelt was not justified in ordering Executive Order 9066 due to violation of constitutional rights, blatant racism, and long term negative consequences caused by the internment of Japanese American citizens in 1942. Franklin Roosevelt used poor judgement when he ordered Executive Order 9066 because of the racism behind this executive order.

While the order also interned 300 Italians and 5,000 German immigrants and naturalized citizens into internment camps, it had the most impact on the Japanese-Americans. By designating war zones from which anyone could be removed, Executive Order 9066 affected civil liberties in the United States. These US citizens never received any form of compensation for the mistreatment and harsh conditions they were obligated to withstand during their stay in these internment camps. Japanese-Americans were denied due process and the guarantee of life, liberty or property contained in the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Executive Order 9066 called for taking Japanese-Americans from their homes and rehousing them to live in internment camps under curfew, with public property restrictions solely based on their ethnic background.

Sam Mihara and the Japanese-American Citizens’ League reacted to Executive Order 9066 differently for these reasons as well. For example, Mihara believed that his rights were being violated, while The League believed they were doing the right thing to help their new country. Sam Mihara announced, “I, for one, knew better. A lot of the young people did. We were American citizens, born and raised, and we understood that we had rights”(source E).

Executive Order 9066: Roots in Prejudice Japan’s bombing of Pearl Harbor crippled the US Naval fleet and killed thousands of soldiers and citizens but more significantly, it destroyed American’s sense of safety and the utopian belief that we were beyond the reach of the world’s problems. The resulting fear that pervaded American society, spread like wildfire and led to an emotional and irrational chapter in American politics that would ignore Japanese citizens’ constitutional rights to appease the hysteria. Americans’ response to the attacks on Pearl Harbor revealed decades of existing prejudices as they turned their anger on their fellow American citizens who were of Japanese descent. Shortly after the Pearl Harbor attacks, on February 19, 1942,

Former United States Representative, Joe Baca, states, “Pearl Harbor caused our nation to wholeheartedly commit to winning World War II, changing the course of our nation’s history and the world’s future.” What this quote purposely left out was how the United States needed a way out of the Great Depression. The only way out of the depression was war. Even with all the acts and plans Franklin D. Roosevelt put forth, none would truly turn the economy around. Pearl Harbor was an emotional time for America; however, it was also an extremely key time for the American government.

The ratification of the US Bill of Rights took place in 1789. The Bill of Rights supply citizens of the US with inalienable rights that they are born with and acquire if they immigrate. Since it was ratified, there have been several occasions in which these rights have been infringed upon during times of conflict, in which the United States government attempts to shield the nation from conflicting issues inside or even outside the country because of fear. The government believes that this unconstitutional action to restrict citizens’ rights must be done to protect citizens of the United States, but in an attempt to protect others, many become mistreated.

The idea of being viewed as the “Other” is prevalent in three court cases that arose when Roosevelt issued the Executive Order. In the case Yasui v. United States, Minoru Yasui, an American lawyer born in Oregon, tested the legitimacy of the executive order by staying out past curfew and turning himself into the police. When the notice came to evacuate, Yasui informed authorities he would not comply and appeared in front of the Supreme Court. He served one year in jail and was fined $5,000. Gordon Kyoshi Hirabayashi, a Japanese American born in Washington, openly defied internment.

The Address of Franklin D. Roosevelt President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in his intricate speech, "Pearl Harbor Speech", affliction throughout American history. Roosevelt's purpose is to exhort congress to declare war on Japan. He adopts an authoritative tone in order to coax in his members of Congress and televised audience. Roosevelt beings his oration by foreshadowing the attack that was "suddenly and deliberately" put on the United States of America. In addition, he willfully states that the two countries were once at peace, Roosevelt adds in his speech that Japan's emperor was "looking toward maintenance of peace in the Pacific", gives a signal that Japan did indeed lie to the U.S.

FDR Rhetorical Analysis President, Franklin D. Roosevelt, in his speech, Pearl Harbor Speech, Interprets the actions of Japan toward the United States on December 8, 1941. Roosevelt's purpose is to convince Congress to formally declare war on Japan. He adopts a compelling tone in order to persuade war in his Congress members. Initiating his speech, Roosevelt utilizes logic to determine the attack was intended due to the distance. When examined the “Distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious” to clarify “The attack was deliberately planned.”