ThreeKings.JPG (645192 bytes)

The vagaries of consent

Justice Hugo Black's Majority Opinion: "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.  It is to say that courts must subject them to the most rigid scrutiny.  Pressing public necessity may sometimes justify the existence of such restrictions, racial antagonism never can."


Justices Owen J. Roberts, Frank Murphy, and Robert H. Jackson dissented.

Korematsu v. United States 323 U.S. 214 (1944)

A case concerning the constitutionality of Executive Order 9066, which ordered Japanese Americans into internment camps during World War II regardless of citizenship. In a 6–3 decision, the Court sided with the government, ruling that the exclusion order was constitutional. Six of eight Roosevelt appointees sided with Roosevelt.  The opinion, written by Supreme Court justice Hugo Black, held that the need to protect against espionage outweighed Toyosaburo Korematsu's individual rights, and the rights of Americans of Japanese descent. (The Court limited its decision to the validity of the exclusion orders, adding, "The provisions of other orders requiring persons of Japanese ancestry to report to assembly centers and providing for the detention of such persons in assembly and relocation centers were separate, and their validity is not in issue in this proceeding.") Korematsu v. United States has been very controversial. Korematsu's conviction for evading internment was overturned on November 10, 1983, after Korematsu challenged the earlier decision by filing for a writ of coram nobis. In a ruling by Judge Marilyn Hall Patel, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted the writ (that is, it voided Korematsu's original conviction) because in Korematsu's original case, the government had knowingly submitted false information to the Supreme Court that had a material effect on the Supreme Court's decision. The Korematsu decision has not been explicitly overturned, although in 2011 the Department of Justice filed official notice, conceding that it was in error, thus erasing the case's value as precedent for interning citizens. However, the Court's opinion remains significant both for being the first instance of the Supreme Court applying the strict scrutiny standard to racial discrimination by the government and for being one of only a handful of cases in which the Court held that the government met that standard.