Korematsu+v.+U.S.


 * 1.**Title Korematsu v. United States


 * 2.** Date on May 19, 1942, during World War II

Fred Korematsu (young)

Harlan F. Stone had of the shortest terms of any __chief justice__ in American history and held all nine positions on the bench at one point. His legal career was only 4 years long until he went into teaching law at Columbia Law School. Then during the end of World War 1 he criticized the current Attorney General until he was appointed the position which was the head of the Department of Justice’s or the FBI. **Did FDR appoint him?** During his terms on the Supreme Court he was highly supportive of Roosevelt’s new deal which many other justices opposed. He died after only five years of his term because of a hemorrhage.
 * 3.** Chief Justice was Harlan F. Stone

Fifth __Aendment__ these Japanese citizens were being sent to camps without a trial Sixth Amendment to because even if these Japanese citizens got a trial they were set very far in the future so they couldn’t leave the camps
 * 4.** Relevance to __constitution__

In this landmark Supreme Court case, Fred Korematsu took on the United States after being caught trying to avoid being thrown into a Japanese internment, or relocation camp during World War II. He felt that the institutions set up by the government were unconstitutional and violated the Sixth and Fifth Amendments. The outcome of the case was a controversial six to three decision siding with the U.S. government allowing Korematsu’s conviction. Their thought behind this vote was that the need to protect American against espionage was more important than the individual rights of Americans. This case could have been different if Charles Fahy a (general of the military) didn’t uphold evidence that no Japanese Americans had ever been disloyal or tried espionage against the United States. **???Explain.**
 * 5.** Summary

**good pics!** Korematsu in center at table


 * 6.** Fred Korematsu evaded government and police efforts to put him in a Japanese camp because he viewed the encampment of the Japanese American citizens to be unconstitutional, so he remained in a restricted area in San Francisco that was close to military defenses and there for a possible target for espionage efforts. The courts and government viewed the threat of espionage to be more important than Japanese American rights, so the government supplied the courts with false information to convict Korematsu.


 * 7.** The court vote was 6 to 3, against Korematsu. The Court sided with the government ruling that the exclusion order was a constitutional decision, and Fred Korematsu, along with most Japanese Americans, were put into camps. **Most Japanese were already in the camps by 1942 b/c of FDR's executive order.**


 * 8.** (See table for votes) Those who voted with the majority jointly decided that the threat of espionage was more important than the rights of the Japanese-Americans, even though they were citizens of the nation, they did not have the same rights. This idea of equal, but not, was used by the American government throughout history and was directed at many different cultures and religions within the United States. **Examples? What about those who voted against the case? What was their rationale?**


 * 9.** The Supreme Court at the time:


 * = **Justice** ||= **Years** || **Vote** ||
 * = //(Chief)// Harlan Stone ||= 19 || With Majority ||
 * = Owen Robers ||= 14 || Against ||
 * = Hugo Black ||= 7 || With Majority ||
 * = Stanley Reed ||= 6 || With Majority ||
 * = Felix Frankfurter ||= 5 || With Majority ||
 * = William Douglas ||= 5 || With Majority ||
 * = William (Frank) Murphy ||= 4 || Against ||
 * = Robert Jackson ||= 3 || Against ||
 * = Wiley Rutledge ||= 1 || With Majority ||
 * 10.** I agree with the decision to reverse the original ruling in this case, **(Huh?)** as the primary decision in Korematsu v. U.S. was completely unconstitutional and undeniably unfair. It was not right for the government to put Japanese descendants into these camps in the first place, just because of their ancestry, which they had no control over. I think that it is good the the U.S. attempted to make amends by payment of reparations in the amount of $20,000 to each camp survivor, but it does not reverse the fact that blatant racism was defended by the law. **When did this happen?**


 * 11.** If Korematsu had won this case, then the United States would have had __o__ follow a much more constitutional process if it wanted to put people away who were thought to be treacherous. All of the Japanese-Americans who had been put into interment camps would have been freed, and allowed back into the work force. On a much grander scale, these citizens could have proven to be a very valuable asset in fighting the Axis Japanese Power. While they would have had to face social segregation in the smaller aspects of life, they would have been able to prove their loyalty to America, after all, it was their home.

__**Bibliography**__ "Korematsu v. United States | The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law." //The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law | A Multimedia Archive of the Supreme Court of the United States//. Web. 09 Feb. 2012. [].

"The Resonance of Korematsu v. U.S." //AsianWeek | Where Asian America Gathers//. Web. 09 Feb. 2012. [].

"Korematsu v. United States | Www.streetlaw.org." //Home | Www.streetlaw.org//. Web. 09 Feb. 2012. .

"Korematsu v. United States." //Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia//. 13 Jan. 2012. Web. 10 Feb. 2012. .

**6.5/7 Biblio -- alphabetize** **23/28 Content - more explanation, with specific accurate details.** **5/5 Organization - Looks good.**

**34.5/40 Total**