Japanese Internment
Racial prejudice and deference to executive authority during a time of national crisis led to the Supreme Court’s sanctioning of the military internment of American citizens in the Korematsu decision.
Issue
Following the Japanese Empire’s devastating surprise attack on Pearl Harbor that thrust the US into WWII, the US government established limited military control over the West Coast as a precaution against a Japanese invasion. President Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 which forced all persons of Japanese descent residing in this military zone to relocate to internment camps to the east, including sites in eastern California, Arizona, Colorado, and Arkansas. The government’s justification asserted that internment was a necessary precaution against possible Japanese spies.
Fred Korematsu, an American citizen, refused to comply with the order and was subsequently arrested and relocated to one of these camps. He sued the government, asserting that his internment was a violation of his 5th Amendment right. The Supreme Court disagreed, ruling in 1944 in Korematsu v. United States that the order was a valid war measure pursuant to a strategic objective.
Causes
The Japanese assault on Hawaii was one in a string of attacks against American and British possessions in the Pacific. In a series of attacks in the final weeks of 1941, Japanese forces took Hong Kong, Guam, and began their attack on American forces in the Philippines. By the beginning of 1942, the Allied position in the Pacific was perilous, and there was a real fear that the Imperial forces would launch an attack on the American mainland.
The Congressional-sponsored Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians report released in 1980 describes how Japanese Americans had consistently been made unwelcome by both the general public and the government since they began immigrating to the United States in large numbers in the late 1800s. By the 1940s, it was still commonly believed that Japanese culture was so different from American culture that Japanese immigrants’ integration would be impossible. This differentiated Japanese Americans from their more integrated German or Italian counterparts whose home nations were also at war with the United States.
Building upon existing racial suspicion, the secretary of the navy perpetuated what became a widespread rumor: Japanese Americans in Hawaii had helped sabotage US forces during the Pearl Harbor attacks. This general suspicion laid the groundwork for a discriminatory policy toward Japanese Americans.
Outcome
By the middle of 1943, the Allies were gaining ground in the Pacific. There was no longer a credible threat of a Japanese invasion. Despite this, the US government held off closing the internment camps for another eighteen months for no reason other than a fear of both an uproar among nativist groups on the West Coast and of potential political repercussions for the Roosevelt administration ahead of the 1944 elections.
Since Korematsu, no issue has come before the Supreme Court which would provide the high court the opportunity to directly overturn the decision. The facts of the 2018 case Trump v. Hawaii were similar enough to Korematsu that the Court could address the constitutional abhorrence of the decision, but not similar enough to negate its standing as good law. Congress has attempted to do its part in repudiating Korematsu; the aforementioned Congressional report asserted that the decision has been “overruled in the court of history”, and the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 issued a formal apology and paid reparations for internment on behalf of the U.S. Government.
Many federal judges have publicly rebuked the decision, including the late Justice Antonin Scalia. In a 2014 talk with students at the University of Hawaii, he said that internment is repugnant to the spirit of the Constitution. He further stated that the American people are naive to think that during a time of perceived threat to the United States, they will not commit a similar act of injustice. Despite the constitutional concerns, Scalia believed that in a mutliethnic democracy like the United States, such a threat is likely to drive wedges into the natural divisions in society, isolating and harming those who are least integrated into mainstream American culture.
Feature image: Posted announcement of the Japanese Exclusion order
