In the sharply-divided decision over President Trump’s travel ban, the Supreme Court repudiated a notorious case from the last century: one that justified…
In the sharply-divided decision over President Trump’s travel ban, the Supreme Court repudiated a notorious case from the last century: one that justified the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed to what she called « stark parallels » between the 1944 Korematsu decision and Tuesday’s ruling, which upheld Trump administration restrictions on would-be visitors from Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Somalia and Yemen.
In both cases, « the Government invoked an ill-defined national-security threat to justify an exclusionary policy of sweeping proportion, » Sotomayor wrote in a dissent joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. « As here, the exclusion order was rooted in dangerous stereotypes about…a particular group’s supposed inability to assimilate and desire to harm the United States. »
Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote for the majority in the travel ban case, dismissed the comparison. While the forcible relocation of Japanese-American citizens to concentration camps was « objectively unlawful » and « morally repugnant, » Roberts argued, « it is wholly inapt to liken that » to the travel ban, which he described as a « facially neutral policy denying certain foreign nationals the privilege of admission. »
Even as he rejected the parallels to the travel ban, though, Roberts took the opportunity to expressly disavow the high court’s 74-year-old decision.
