Kang - RNANDEZ.‘J TEXAS tetra-tin substantially ertheless...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: RNANDEZ .‘J. TEXAS tetra-tin substantially ertheless. in a brief “refers prevailed in a 1 status or respect. they showed that it dragon rifgl'im Crow. than that: They also why and when some Protection Clause. . way he occluded in :‘tion is group suhor- on. More than fift}r e countryr as a whole the Supreme Court .nL lessons taught by w. DilLlIiIJl LLl thejury poo. in .> of Venue Rfiii‘ig Hen-ml. -_|. Hertz, "h-‘o One Con 3111 Aeneta’s challenges to see l'lttneji- Lopez. supra. . "Breaking the Law" on ad legal Regina-s, 52 Li. .-i rlf underrepresel'itat'ien, coring ti. Cr'rttriti Jury: sin :tp:_-'_-'i-:wjej.ejeefl'ltertrnrgjal'c J err}! Rang Dodging Reapunaibiliiy: The Story of Hirabayashf V. United States Introduction "Strict scrutiny” for race—based classifications is typically traced haelt to Koi‘emo‘fstt ti. United States} the Japanese—American internment case in which the Supreme Court trumpeted that “all legal restrictions which curtail the civil rights of a single racial group are immediater suspect.“2 But the link can he made one year earlier; to the first of the internment caeea: Hirdhttrachi L'. United States.3 although lest-e weiL known, Hirttottt'ttsftt is arguably the more importanL case because it created the procedural and preeedential foundation upon which Kameham- s'tt was huilt,J To complicate matters. we must take account of two Hirehaymhi niece: one decided during World War ii, and the other a part of the 19803 comm debts cases. in these latter raises, the men whose cont-je— tions the Supreme Court affirmed in the 194115 marched each into federal district court, and on the basis: of “smelting gun” erirlonee discovered in the National Archives, the}r achieved vindication four decades after their initial defeat. Although these cases are rightly cele- 1323 L'fi. 2L4 [19-1-1]. 3M. at 21%. '3 323 El lifldfiii. 4 See. an, Regents of the Univ. of (Eat. r. BHl-tl—Ct—t: «133 ES 255: 29mm (153.755,. [firing t.;. flatten-Fusion": lllt-rn :‘Tfll'fillltitfi‘it for strict scrutiny t-ILi-Jntlm't'l]; Suite-n Se Hcl’tud‘l‘J-‘fl', Inc. 1;. Members of the NY. State Crime 1victims Bi: EDIE UE. 'Iiifi: 12-1 [1991;- [Kennedfi .i. titmL‘L'TTmfi} Initiiig ‘:I2- b'inrfztryeai'zi for equal protection principles). _._.--m= .l'fl In" I I _._ 325 THE STORY OJ." HIRABAYA‘EHI e. 'NJ'TEI'J STATES or, is Hit-comment’s relationship to Koreinreso and Eodo, the. two cases decided the hallowing year. Opening Kore matsu ’3 floor In Korcmetsu, the Court, in an opinion lay Justice Huge Black, hegan hy replicating the segmentation technique introduced in Honori— yoshi. Ignoring the governments own concession to the contrary,“ the lourt speculated thaL, had Koreinatsu oheyed the evacuation order. he might not have ended up in a relocation camp after all.“ Accordingly! the lCourt would focus exclusively on the legality of eeecoation and ignore questions related to detention. lt'lloalting itself in the mantle of self- reersint. the lCourt exclaimed: “To do 1nore. would he to go beyond the issues raised, and to decide momentous questions net contained within the Framework of the pleadings or the evidence in this Eats-EKHH Through segmentation, then, the only question presented was whether the government could require Japanese eincricans to evacuate their homes temporarily—as if a hurricane were coining—tor personal safety and L‘ne good of the country. In answering this narrowly framed question! the Court announced that fill legal restrictions which curtail the civil rights of a single racial group are immediately suspect. That is not to say that ali such restrictions are unconstitutional. It is Lo say that courts must suhject them to the most rigid scrutiny. Pressing puhlie necessity may sometimes justify the existence of such restrictions} racial anLagonism never can:'4 I'l‘his language marks Koremutso as the fount of strieL scrutiny. in application, however: the flowery rhetoric wilted into limp acceptance of erude, Lime-worn racial stert-iotypes. In the Court’s view: “pressing public necessity” included assumptions of disloyalty hssed on race; such gener- alisaLions were not seen as evidence of “racial antagonir-iin.”Ts rl‘he payoff oi" the segmentation technique execuLed in Honoaycasiii was substantial. Reneging on its promise not to use Hire-hayride as Tl sit-t- Brief for the United States aL sees. fiorciiiatsu 'v'. United States, 323 L15. 21-4 11.944! fine. 221 reprinted in 42 Larsdtrient Briers end Arguments ofthe Supreme Cour-5 of .'.'re {Paired Sashes: Christel-rii'snui Lane 151?. ‘ZfiU-iil [Philin B. Kurlimd I3: Gerhard Casper eds: iEl'a'EijI [hereinafter larrti'rrsun'c Briefs] [":ll]ed [Korerttatsul obeyed all of the provisions of the order and tile :Lcceiiipanyjng Instructions, Iiiel would have found liiliiSElF 5hr 3 period of time: tile length of which was not Liien ascertainalile. in a place of detention.”i. 73 £95.16: Kort-Iranian. 323- L GI: 2‘21. 73 In: at 2.22. 7“ Id. LIL 215. '53 Her-.- ."t:'. at 219. ...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/08/2010 for the course MAS 215 at San Jose State.

Page1 / 2

Kang - RNANDEZ.‘J TEXAS tetra-tin substantially ertheless...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online