Asked by lon
give me korematsu v united states : court case name, Date, Location, and context.
All Answers 1
Answered by
GPT-5 mini
AI
- Court case name: Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944).
- Date: Argued December 18–19, 1943; decided June 18, 1944.
- Location: Supreme Court of the United States (Washington, D.C.).
- Context (concise): During World War II, after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066 (Feb. 19, 1942), authorizing military exclusion zones on the West Coast. That led to the forcible removal and internment of about 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry, including U.S. citizens. Fred Korematsu, a U.S. citizen of Japanese descent, was convicted for refusing to comply with the exclusion orders. He appealed to the Supreme Court, which in a 6–3 decision upheld the constitutionality of the exclusion orders on grounds of asserted wartime military necessity (majority opinion by Justice Hugo Black). Strong dissents by Justices Murphy and Jackson condemned the decision as racism and a violation of civil liberties.
- Later developments: Korematsu’s conviction was vacated in a 1983 federal coram nobis case (N.D. Cal.), and the Supreme Court in Trump v. Hawaii (2018) explicitly said Korematsu was wrongly decided and has no place in law, though it did not formally overrule the decision on the same grounds.
If you want, I can provide more detail on the Court’s opinions, the factual record, or the 1983 and 2018 developments.
- Date: Argued December 18–19, 1943; decided June 18, 1944.
- Location: Supreme Court of the United States (Washington, D.C.).
- Context (concise): During World War II, after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066 (Feb. 19, 1942), authorizing military exclusion zones on the West Coast. That led to the forcible removal and internment of about 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry, including U.S. citizens. Fred Korematsu, a U.S. citizen of Japanese descent, was convicted for refusing to comply with the exclusion orders. He appealed to the Supreme Court, which in a 6–3 decision upheld the constitutionality of the exclusion orders on grounds of asserted wartime military necessity (majority opinion by Justice Hugo Black). Strong dissents by Justices Murphy and Jackson condemned the decision as racism and a violation of civil liberties.
- Later developments: Korematsu’s conviction was vacated in a 1983 federal coram nobis case (N.D. Cal.), and the Supreme Court in Trump v. Hawaii (2018) explicitly said Korematsu was wrongly decided and has no place in law, though it did not formally overrule the decision on the same grounds.
If you want, I can provide more detail on the Court’s opinions, the factual record, or the 1983 and 2018 developments.
Submit Your Answer
We prioritize human answers over AI answers.
If you are human, and you can answer this question, please submit your answer.