Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Korematsu opinion was the first instance in which the Supreme Court applied the strict scrutiny standard of review to racial discrimination by the government; it is one of only a handful of cases in which the Court held that the government met this standard.
A case that focused on Japanese Americans who were denied citizenship and forced to move is the case of Korematsu v. United States. Fred Korematsu refused to obey the wartime order to leave his home and report to a relocation camp for Japanese Americans. He was arrested and convicted. After losing in the Court of Appeals, he appealed to the ...
United States and Korematsu v. United States . The report would have undermined the administration's position of the military necessity for such action, as it concluded that most Japanese Americans were not a national security threat, and that allegations of communication espionage had been found to be without basis by the FBI and Federal ...
As applied in Korematsu v. United States, which upheld the race-based exclusion order and internment during World War II of Japanese Americans who had resided on the West Coast of the United States, strict scrutiny was limited to instances of de jure discrimination, where a racial classification is written into the language of a statute.
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
The Supreme Court established the judicial precedent for suspect classifications in the cases of Hirabayashi v.United States [5] and Korematsu v. United States. [6] The Supreme Court recognizes race, national origin, and religion as suspect classes; it therefore analyzes any government action that discriminates against these classes under strict scrutiny.
In a 6–3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Korematsu's conviction in Korematsu v. United States in December of that year. [10] Nearly four decades later, in November 1983, the U.S. District Court in San Francisco formally granted the writ of coram nobis and vacated the conviction. [11]
Ex parte Mitsuye Endo, 323 U.S. 283 (1944), was a United States Supreme Court ex parte decision handed down on December 18, 1944, in which the Court unanimously ruled that the U.S. government could not continue to detain a citizen who was "concededly loyal" to the United States. [1]