Only the Exclusion Order Need Be Evaluated for Constitutionality.Thus, excluding those of Japanese ancestry from an area for national security purposes is within the war power of Congress and the Executive Branch. The hardship placed on Japanese-Americans is a burden due to the war. The military determined that it was not possible to distinguish the loyal from the disloyal, and therefore made the exclusion order. Given that the evacuation order that Korematsu violated was implemented for the same reason, the Court must give similar deference. ![]() In Hirabayashi, the Court reasoned that it must defer to the expertise of the military to do what is necessary for national security, and the curfew order was – in the military’s judgment – necessary to prevent espionage and sabotage in an area threatened by Japanese attack. The curfew order was made pursuant to President Roosevelt’s Executive Order. to 6 a.m., for all citizens of Japanese ancestry on the West Coast. In Hirabayashi, the Court permitted a military mandated curfew, from 8 p.m. 81, an earlier Supreme Court decision, controls this case. Another order was for Japanese-Americans to report to designated “relocation centers.” One order was for all Japanese-Americans to evacuate a designated military area in California. In implementing the Executive Order, the Army Commander in the western states of the U.S. In response, President Franklin Roosevelt signed an Executive Order allowing for the detention of Americans of Japanese descent as a national security measure necessary to protect against sabotage or espionage by Japanese-Americans. In 1941, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor during the Second World War. It held that forcible detention of Japanese-Americans was constitutional in times of war, giving deference to decisions of the Executive Branch.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |