Podcasts about korematsu

From December 26, 2023: The Supreme Court during World War II issued some of the most notorious opinions in its history, including the Japanese exclusion case, Korematsu v. United States, and the Nazi saboteur military commission case, Ex parte Quirin. For a fresh take on these and related cases and a broader perspective on the Supreme Court during World War II, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Cliff Sloan, a professor at Georgetown Law Center and a former Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure, to discuss his new book, which is called “The Court at War: FDR, His Justices, and the World They Made.” They discussed how the Court's decisions during World War II were informed by the very close personal bonds of affection that most of the justices had with President Roosevelt and by the justices' intimate attachment to and involvement with the war effort. They also discussed the fascinating internal deliberations in Korematsu, Quirin, and other momentous cases, and the puzzle of why the same court that issued these decisions also, during the same period, issued famous rights-expanding decisions in the areas of reproductive freedom, voting rights, and freedom of speech.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This Day in Legal History: Executive Order 9066On February 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, authorizing the forced relocation and internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. Issued in the wake of Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor, the order empowered the military to designate "exclusion zones" from which individuals could be removed. Although the order did not explicitly mention Japanese Americans, it led to the incarceration of over 120,000 people of Japanese descent, two-thirds of whom were U.S. citizens. Families were uprooted from their homes and businesses, sent to remote camps under harsh conditions, and held without due process. The Supreme Court upheld the internment in Korematsu v. United States (1944), ruling that national security concerns justified the action. Decades later, the decision was widely condemned, and in 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act, formally apologizing and granting reparations to surviving internees. The internment remains a stark example of how fear and prejudice can lead to grave violations of constitutional rights.The Department of Government Efficiency (DGE), spearheaded by Elon Musk, claims to have saved $55 billion in federal spending, but publicly available data only supports about $8.6 billion in verified savings. A major accounting error inflated a single contract cancellation from $8 million to $8 billion, significantly distorting the numbers. Despite promising "maximum transparency," DGE operates outside traditional oversight, raising concerns about its accountability. Musk, whose companies receive billions in federal contracts, is supposedly self-policing conflicts of interest. Meanwhile, a federal judge has allowed DGE to continue slashing jobs and contracts, handing Trump a legal win. The administration touts these efforts as transformative, with Trump and Musk claiming they'll eventually cut $1 trillion in waste. However, with major entitlement programs off-limits and nearly half of discretionary spending tied to defense, the math is fuzzy at best. Who knew the efficiency agency run by the guy who wildly guessed about Twitter bots might struggle with basic accounting?DOGE Says It's Saved $55 Billion, Itemized Data Show Far LessBradley Weinsheimer, the Justice Department's top ethics official, resigned after being reassigned by Trump administration officials to a new working group on sanctuary cities. A 34-year DOJ veteran, Weinsheimer opted for deferred resignation rather than accept the move, joining a wave of career officials who have left amid concerns over the politicization of the department. His ethics duties were transferred to two political appointees—one of whom helped defend Trump in his New York hush-money case, and the other a 2021 law school graduate. Critics, including former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, argue this shift undermines the DOJ's independence. The Trump administration has aggressively reshaped the department, firing or reassigning officials and dropping criminal cases against Trump under the rationale that sitting presidents shouldn't be prosecuted. The Justice Department, now led by Attorney General Pam Bondi—another former Trump defense lawyer—has also launched a “weaponization working group” to scrutinize past investigations into Trump. The White House, for its part, insists the DOJ was previously weaponized against Trump and is now being restored.Senior Justice Department ethics official resigns over sidelining by Trump appointees, source says | ReutersA federal judge is set to hear arguments on whether to dismiss corruption charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams, following a controversial request from Trump administration prosecutors. The Justice Department, under orders from Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove—a former Trump defense lawyer—asked to drop the case, claiming Adams is needed to help enforce the president's immigration policies. The move has sparked outrage, with several prosecutors, including the lead attorney, resigning in protest. Critics argue the dismissal is politically motivated, especially after reports that Adams' team suggested the mayor would support Trump's policies if the charges disappeared. The DOJ insists the decision isn't about the case's merits, but Adams' political future. The charges, filed under Biden's administration, accused Adams of accepting bribes from Turkish nationals, which he denies. The dismissal would be *without prejudice*, meaning the case could be reopened after the November mayoral election—something critics see as a pressure tactic. With Adams' political future in question and New York Democrats calling for his resignation, the legal and political stakes are high.Judge to weigh Trump administration bid to drop NY mayor Eric Adams' case | ReutersElectric-truck maker Nikola has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, citing cash shortages and difficulties securing funding. The company, which once promised to revolutionize the EV industry, struggled with leadership instability, weak sales, and a plummeting stock price. Like other pandemic-era EV startups such as Fisker and Lordstown Motors, Nikola found itself unable to sustain its capital-intensive operations as high interest rates and low demand dried up investor support. The company plans to sell off most or all of its assets while maintaining limited truck and hydrogen-fueling operations through March. Nikola, which went public in 2020 via a SPAC deal, has cycled through four CEOs in four years, with industry veteran Stephen Girsky currently at the helm. Despite ramping up production of hydrogen-powered trucks in 2024, the company bled money, losing hundreds of thousands of dollars per vehicle. Fleet operators' reluctance to invest in EV infrastructure further compounded its struggles. The bankruptcy marks the end of a turbulent journey for a firm that once positioned itself as Tesla's trucking rival.Struggling e-truck maker Nikola files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Fred Korematsu Day of Civil Liberties and the ConstitutionOn January 30, several U.S. states recognize Fred Korematsu Day of Civil Liberties and the Constitution, honoring the Japanese American civil rights activist who fought against the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. Korematsu was arrested in 1942 for refusing to comply with Executive Order 9066, which mandated the forced relocation and incarceration of Japanese Americans in internment camps. His legal challenge led to the Supreme Court case Korematsu v. United States (1944), in which the Court upheld the internment as a wartime necessity. Decades later, in 1983, new evidence revealed that the U.S. government had withheld critical information from the Court, and Korematsu's conviction was overturned in a federal court ruling. Although the Supreme Court's original decision was never formally overturned, it has been widely condemned and was explicitly discredited in Trump v. Hawaii (2018).Korematsu spent the rest of his life advocating for civil rights, receiving the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1998. His legacy serves as a reminder of the dangers of racial discrimination and unchecked government power. California was the first state to recognize Fred Korematsu Day in 2010, with other states following in later years. The day is used to promote awareness of civil liberties, constitutional rights, and the impact of past injustices. Schools, libraries, and civic organizations hold educational programs to highlight the importance of vigilance against government overreach. The Korematsu Institute continues his work by advocating for civil rights education. His story is a crucial part of American legal history, reminding the nation that constitutional rights must be protected for all.Former EEOC Chair Charlotte Burrows, fired by Donald Trump, has retained high-profile attorneys Lisa Banks and Debra Katz to explore legal options. No president has previously fired an EEOC commissioner, and Trump's actions also removed another Democratic member, Jocelyn Samuels, leaving the agency without a quorum. Samuels and Burrows claim they were dismissed due to their views on sex discrimination and diversity initiatives, which Trump opposes. Banks and Katz, known for representing Christine Blasey Ford in Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings, have criticized the firings as a political attack. Their firm is also consulting with other government officials dismissed by Trump. The EEOC terminations coincide with broader efforts by Trump to reshape federal agencies, including purging officials from the National Labor Relations Board. Samuels, like Burrows, is considering legal action, but specific claims have not yet been disclosed.EEOC commissioner fired by Trump hires Kavanaugh accuser's lawyers | ReutersThe Trump administration reversed its decision to freeze hundreds of billions in federal aid after facing legal challenges and bipartisan opposition. The White House had initially paused grant and loan payments, citing a need to review spending on programs Trump opposes, such as diversity initiatives and green energy. However, as lawsuits progressed, officials rescinded the order, likely to avoid a court ruling against them. A federal judge in Rhode Island still held a hearing on the case, indicating concerns over the freeze's impact. Despite the reversal, Trump vowed to continue cutting funding for initiatives he disapproves of.  The failed freeze was part of broader efforts by Trump to reshape the government, including removing security protections for a former military official and preparing Guantanamo Bay for detained migrants. His administration also revoked diversity programs in the military and pushed through controversial cabinet appointments, including a defense secretary accused of misconduct. While some Republicans defended the spending freeze as a fiscal responsibility measure, bipartisan lawmakers criticized the confusion and harm it caused. Payments for medical services resumed, but housing assistance remained disrupted. Congress members overseeing federal budgets welcomed the reversal, calling the freeze overreaching and chaotic.White House revokes spending freeze in the face of legal challenges | ReutersTrump's firing of National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) member Gwynne Wilcox is expected to spark a major legal battle over the president's authority to remove independent agency officials. Federal labor law permits removal of NLRB members only for neglect or malfeasance, and legal scholars widely agree that Trump's move violates existing precedent. The administration is likely using the case as a test to challenge the Supreme Court's 1935 ruling in Humphrey's Executor v. United States, which upheld limits on presidential removal powers for multi-member commissions.Trump's legal justification relies on the Court's 2020 decision in Seila Law LLC v. CFPB, which invalidated removal protections for the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), arguing that NLRB members do not qualify for exceptions to presidential removal power. However, experts argue that Seila Law was meant to carve out, not overturn, Humphrey's Executor. The Supreme Court has recently expanded presidential removal authority, as seen in Collins v. Yellen (2021) concerning the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA). It has also struck down dual-layer removal protections, as in Free Enterprise Fund v. PCAOB.Wilcox has vowed legal action, and her removal could also be challenged by unions affected by the NLRB's lack of a quorum. If courts adhere to Humphrey's Executor, Trump's action may be overturned. However, if the case reaches the Supreme Court, it could provide an opportunity to further weaken constraints on presidential control over independent agencies.Trump's Labor Board Firing Sets Up Agency Independence Test Case This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Mona interviews Georgetown law professor Stephen Vladeck on executive orders, birthright citizenship, Congress not doing its job, and whether Trump will defy the Supreme Court. Referenced Cases: Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952) – Commonly referred to as the "Steel Seizure Case," it involved President Truman's attempt to take control of steel mills during the Korean War. Korematsu v. United States (1944) – Upheld the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II; later criticized but not formally overturned until its repudiation in Trump v. Hawaii. Ex Parte Endo (1944) – A companion case to Korematsu, ruling the detention of a loyal Japanese American citizen was unauthorized by statute. Trump v. Hawaii (2018) – Upheld the Trump administration's travel ban but included the repudiation of Korematsu as part of the decision. United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898) – Affirmed the principle of birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment. INS v. Chadha (1983) – Declared legislative vetoes unconstitutional, affecting the National Emergencies Act. TikTok-related Executive Orders and Litigation – Mentioned in the context of national security and executive overreach. Referenced Works: The U.S. Constitution: Article II: Presidential powers. 14th Amendment: Citizenship clause.

Constitutional Law Lecture 1 – Structure of Government and Separation of Powers Source: Excerpts from "Constitutional Law Lecture 1: The Structure of Government and Separation of Powers" I. Foundational Overview I begin by noting that the U.S. Constitution creates a structure of government designed to prevent tyranny. The three branches—Congress (legislative), the President (executive), and the courts (judicial)—operate under a system of separation of powers. This arrangement is complemented by checks and balances, whereby each branch can restrain the others. Federalism further divides power between the federal government and the states. Key Themes: Separation of Powers: This doctrine ensures that no single branch amasses unchecked authority. “Separation of powers is … the bedrock of the American constitutional system.” Checks and Balances: Each branch has devices (like vetoes or judicial review) to limit the other branches. “These interlocking mechanisms create a dynamic tension that fosters a balance of power.” Federalism: The Constitution specifies certain powers (enumerated) for the federal government and reserves others for the states. Judicial Review: Established in Marbury v. Madison, it empowers courts to strike down unconstitutional laws or actions. “Without Marbury, the checks and balances system would lack a critical enforcement mechanism.” Supremacy Clause: Federal law preempts conflicting state law, unifying legal standards throughout the nation. II. Constitutional Foundations Articles I, II, III, and VI Article I defines Congress's powers, including the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause. Article II vests executive power in the President, granting authority as Commander-in-Chief and in foreign affairs. Article III establishes the judiciary, anchored by the Supreme Court. Article VI contains the Supremacy Clause, ensuring federal law supremacy. Federalism and Division of Power Enumerated Powers: Taxation, regulation of interstate commerce, defense. Reserved Powers: Those retained by states (e.g., police powers, education). Key Cases: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) upheld implied federal powers. Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) expanded Congress's reach over interstate commerce. III. Separation of Powers Doctrine Legislative Powers (Congress) Commerce Clause: Broad authority over interstate activities, yet subject to judicial limits (United States v. Lopez). Taxing and Spending: Congress can attach conditions to federal funds (South Dakota v. Dole). Necessary and Proper Clause: Permits laws essential to carrying out enumerated powers. Nondelegation Doctrine: Congress must not transfer its core legislative function to another branch (INS v. Chadha). Executive Powers (President) Commander-in-Chief: Authority over military decisions. Appointment: Nominates judges and officials (with Senate approval). Veto: Power to reject legislation. Foreign Affairs: Treaties, diplomacy; recognized as broad in United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. Key Cases: Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952) – limited executive power over private property without legislative authorization. United States v. Nixon (1974) – limited executive privilege in criminal investigations. Judicial Powers Judicial Review: Power to invalidate unconstitutional statutes (Marbury v. Madison). Justiciability: Requires standing, ripeness, and mootness for a federal court to hear a case (Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife). Federal Question Jurisdiction: Authority over federal issues; example: Brown v. Board of Education (1954) advanced civil rights jurisprudence. IV. Checks and Balances in Practice Interbranch Conflicts Congress → Executive: Impeachment, budgetary control. Executive → Congress: Veto power, executive orders. Judiciary → Both: Judicial review of legislative acts and executive actions (Cooper v. Aaron). Balancing National Security and Civil Liberties Key examples include Korematsu v. United States (1944) and Ha --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Constitutional Law Lecture 1 - Structure of Government and Separation of Powers Introduction This lecture provides an overview of the structure of the U.S. government, emphasizing the doctrines of separation of powers and checks and balances, alongside foundational constitutional principles like federalism, judicial review, and constitutional supremacy. Key themes include: Separation of Powers: Division of authority among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches to prevent tyranny. Checks and Balances: Mechanisms for interbranch accountability. Federalism: Division of powers between the federal government and states. Judicial Review: Courts' power to declare laws unconstitutional. Constitutional Supremacy: Federal law and the Constitution take precedence over state law. Part 1: Constitutional Foundations Overview of the Constitution: Articles I, II, and III establish legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Article VI's Supremacy Clause ensures federal law overrides state laws. Marbury v. Madison (1803) established judicial review, making courts coequal enforcers of the Constitution. Federalism: Balances federal and state authority: Federal powers: Taxation, interstate commerce, national defense (e.g., Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)). State powers: Police powers, education, intrastate commerce (reserved via the 10th Amendment). Key cases: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): Established federal supremacy and implied powers. Arizona v. United States (2012): Reinforced federal preemption over conflicting state laws. Printz v. United States (1997): Limited federal overreach on states' autonomy. Part 2: The Separation of Powers Doctrine Legislative Powers (Article I): Bicameral Congress enacts laws using powers such as: Commerce Clause (e.g., Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) expanded federal power; United States v. Lopez (1995) limited it). Taxing and Spending Power (e.g., South Dakota v. Dole (1987) upheld conditional federal funding). Necessary and Proper Clause: Authorizes laws to execute enumerated powers. Limits: Nondelegation Doctrine: Congress must set clear guidelines when delegating authority. Presentment Clause: Bills must pass both chambers and be presented to the President (INS v. Chadha (1983) invalidated legislative vetoes). Executive Powers (Article II): Includes: Commander-in-Chief authority. Appointment power (subject to Senate confirmation; limited by NLRB v. Noel Canning (2014)). Veto power and foreign affairs authority (United States v. Curtiss-Wright (1936)). Limits: Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952): Prohibited unauthorized presidential seizure of private property. United States v. Nixon (1974): Limited executive privilege, affirming no one is above the law. Judicial Powers (Article III): Supreme Court exercises judicial review (Marbury v. Madison) and hears cases involving federal law or constitutional issues. Justiciability doctrines: Standing: E.g., Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992). Ripeness, mootness, and political questions limit courts' jurisdiction. Federal judges' independence is ensured through life tenure and salary protections. Part 3: Checks and Balances in Practice Interbranch Conflicts: Legislative Checks on Executive: Impeachment (e.g., impeachments of Johnson, Clinton, Trump). Control of funding and oversight hearings. Executive Checks on Legislative: Veto power, executive orders, and signing statements. Judicial Checks on Both: Judicial review (e.g., Brown v. Board of Education, Cooper v. Aaron (1958) reaffirmed federal judicial supremacy). Balancing National Security and Civil Liberties: Cases such as: Korematsu v. United States (1944): Upheld controversial wartime actions, later repudiated by Trump v. Hawaii (2018). Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004): Affirmed detainees' due process rights. Ex parte Milligan (1866): Limited military tribunals where civilian courts are operational. Practical Applications and Exam Strategies Hypotheticals to Consider: Delegation of power to agencies --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/law-school/support

Today on the Show: National Book Award Winning poet, Martin Espada, reads and speaks out on the Trump promise to deport a million brown and black people, forcibly if need be: also we'll look at Justice Robert Jackson's dissent in the Korematsu case regarding the brutal internment during World War Two of  thousands of Japanese Americans And  Israel's bloody genocide continues to target children and medical centers across gaza. Nora Barrows Friedman documents another week of the US armed violence and mass murder The post Award Winning Poet Martin Espada on Trump's Promise to Deport Millions appeared first on KPFA.

This Day in Legal History: Korematsu DecisionOn December 18, 1944, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered its controversial decision in Korematsu v. United States, upholding the forced relocation and internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. The case challenged Executive Order 9066, issued by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1942, which authorized the removal of over 120,000 Japanese Americans from their homes to internment camps. Fred Korematsu, a U.S. citizen of Japanese descent, defied the order, arguing that it violated his constitutional rights.In a 6-3 decision, the Court ruled that the internment was a valid exercise of wartime authority, emphasizing the need to protect national security over individual rights during a period of "emergency and peril." Writing for the majority, Justice Hugo Black stated that the internment was not based on racial prejudice but on military necessity, a justification many have since criticized as a flawed rationale.The dissenting justices, including Justice Murphy, condemned the decision as a blatant violation of constitutional rights and a form of racial discrimination. Justice Murphy called the internment camps "a legalization of racism," while Justice Jackson warned of the dangerous precedent the ruling could set.Though the decision has never been explicitly overturned, Korematsu has been widely discredited. In 1983, Korematsu's conviction was vacated by a federal court, acknowledging government misconduct in the case. In 2018, the Supreme Court criticized the decision in Trump v. Hawaii, stating it "was gravely wrong the day it was decided."The legacy of Korematsu remains a stark reminder of the fragility of civil liberties during times of fear and conflict, prompting ongoing discussions about justice, prejudice, and constitutional protections. It should inspire us to question how firmly we hold our principles when we don't hold fast to them in the face of consequence but instead abandon them entirely; when we preference a temporary assuaging of fear among the skittish masses above the rights of citizens. Korematsu remains a stain on U.S. history and carries continued resonance into the modern day, as we confront the consequences of electing a president, House, and Senate largely on the strength of their promise to intern ethnic minorities. Those that would seek to distance our actions today from 1944 would suggest that interned Japanese-Americans were largely citizens, and detained immigrants today are not – but this raises the question of who controls the bestowing of citizenship, the immigrant or the state?A federal judge, Michael Ponsor, faced ethical violations after criticizing Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito in a New York Times essay. Ponsor condemned Alito for displaying controversial flags outside his properties, including an upside-down American flag associated with Trump supporters during the January 6 Capitol riot. The critique spurred a judicial misconduct complaint by the conservative Article III Project, leading to an investigation.Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Albert Diaz ruled that Ponsor's essay undermined public confidence in judicial integrity and violated the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges by commenting on partisan issues. Though the essay did not reference a specific case, it coincided with debates about Alito's potential recusal from cases involving the January 6 riot and Trump's immunity bid. Ponsor apologized in a letter, acknowledging the ethical breach and committing to consulting judicial panels before future public writings.The controversy highlights tensions surrounding judicial impartiality and political commentary, particularly as it intersects with high-profile cases and public scrutiny. Just to check the box score here, that is one judicial misconduct violation for the judge that criticized the justice that flew insurrectionist flags at his home–none for the latter. Judge's criticism of US Supreme Court's Alito over flags is deemed improper | ReutersElon Musk has publicly opposed the Republican plan to temporarily fund the government, adding tension to Speaker Mike Johnson's efforts to secure a deal before Friday's shutdown deadline. The proposed legislation includes billions in disaster relief and agricultural funding, angering fiscal conservatives. Musk, tapped by President-elect Donald Trump to advise on government efficiency, criticized the bill on X, reflecting growing conservative discontent. Johnson acknowledged Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy's concerns but stressed the need for bipartisan cooperation given the narrow Republican majority.The funding dispute highlights ongoing GOP divisions that previously ousted Speaker Kevin McCarthy. Johnson faces an even slimmer majority due to recent election losses and Trump's appointment of three Republican representatives to his administration. This leaves the party with a precarious one-vote margin until special elections in April. Conservatives like Marjorie Taylor Greene have criticized the bill's added spending as unnecessary, predicting it will gain more Democratic than Republican support, risking further internal conflict.Johnson remains confident about retaining his position as Speaker despite challenges, emphasizing his focus on immediate legislative priorities, including the budget blueprint and border security measures.Trump Key Adviser Musk Comes Out Against Year-End Funding BillA special master has ordered TikTok Inc. to provide source code, financial data, and usage data for its apps, including CapCut and BytePlus Video Editor, in a trade secrets and copyright infringement case filed by Beijing Meishe Network Technology Co. The Chinese tech company alleges that TikTok misappropriated its video and audio editing source code, accusing a former Meishe engineer of trade theft before joining TikTok.The case, originally filed in Texas in 2021, was transferred to California in 2023. TikTok argued that discovery about its apps, including Faceu and Lemon8, was irrelevant because U.S. laws do not typically apply to conduct outside the country. However, the special master, Hon. Kendall J. Newman (Ret.), ruled that discovery was necessary since Meishe may recover damages for foreign infringement if it can show TikTok copied its code in the U.S. and used it abroad.TikTok has 30 days to comply with the order, which allows Meishe to pursue claims involving extraterritorial damages. Meanwhile, TikTok also faces a potential U.S. government ban unless its parent company, ByteDance Ltd., divests the app by January 19. On the same day, Newman partially granted TikTok's request to compel Meishe to disclose documents about its affiliate XAT, which allegedly developed the disputed source code.TikTok Must Turn Over Code, Financial Data in Trade Secrets SuitDemocratic state attorneys general (AGs) are preparing to defend environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives against expected challenges from the incoming Trump administration and Republican-controlled Congress. They plan to leverage the Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which limits agency regulatory authority, to counter potential anti-ESG actions that lack explicit congressional approval. Minnesota AG Keith Ellison and Nevada AG Aaron Ford emphasized their readiness to use legal frameworks like the Administrative Procedure Act and Loper Bright to protect ESG-related policies.Concerns include possible rollbacks of Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rules facilitating ESG proposals, restrictions on corporate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, and curtailment of climate-related disclosures. The GOP's Project 2025 agenda calls for sweeping changes, including a task force to challenge ESG/DEI practices and reclassification of DEI as discriminatory. Ellison and Ford argue such measures risk undermining civil rights and shareholder freedoms.Democratic AGs have pledged to challenge these policies in court and defend existing ESG regulations, such as the SEC's climate disclosure rules. Meanwhile, Republican AGs are aligning with Trump's deregulatory agenda, with Tennessee AG Jonathan Skrmetti noting their support through briefs and interventions. Both sides are preparing for extensive legal battles over the regulatory future of ESG and DEI initiatives.Blue State AGs Prepare to Use Loper Bright Ruling to Defend ESG This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Join host Amy Gunn as she interviews Former U.S. Attorney and Acting Administrator of the DEA Chuck Rosenberg. As they delve into his study of Japanese American internment during WWII, Rosenberg discusses Executive Order 9066, ignored intelligence reports revealing no espionage threat, and landmark cases such as Hirabayashi, Korematsu, and Endo. He reveals how suppression of evidence led to devastating rulings justifying internment, even as Japanese American soldiers fought abroad while their families remained detained. Reflecting on this history, Rosenberg emphasizes the ongoing need for vigilance against fear-driven injustice.  

The Supreme Court didn't JUST rule that presidents have absolute presidential immunity. They actually ruled that presidents have absolute presidential immunity PLUS.Constitutional scholars left, right, and center are excoriating the new Supreme Court opinion that 1. contradicts the expressed language of our constitution, 2. actually repeals portions of our constitution, and, in essence, 3. declares the constitution is unconstitutional. Yes, that is illogical, but that is precisely what Chief Justice Roberts and the radical right-wing block of justices did in Trump vs. United States.This ruling gives Donald Trump a blueprint to convert America into a banana republic. And Donald Trump is exactly the kind of day-one-dictator who will do it. This ruling not only excuses lawless conduct by a corrupt president, it endorses such conduct, and thereby encourages future presidents to act lawlessly and to direct others to to the same then simply exercise his core constitutional power of the presidential pardon to pardon all of his criminal associates who carry out his unlawful commands. This is not just absolute presidential power. It is absolute presidential power PLUS. And like Dred Scott, Korematsu, and Plessy vs. Ferguson, this opinion must not stand.If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Supreme Court didn't JUST rule that presidents have absolute presidential immunity. They actually ruled that presidents have absolute presidential immunity PLUS.Constitutional scholars left, right, and center are excoriating the new Supreme Court opinion that 1. contradicts the expressed language of our constitution, 2. actually repeals portions of our constitution, and, in essence, 3. declares the constitution is unconstitutional. Yes, that is illogical, but that is precisely what Chief Justice Roberts and the radical right-wing block of justices did in Trump vs. United States.This ruling gives Donald Trump a blueprint to convert America into a banana republic. And Donald Trump is exactly the kind of day-one-dictator who will do it. This ruling not only excuses lawless conduct by a corrupt president, it endorses such conduct, and thereby encourages future presidents to act lawlessly and to direct others to to the same then simply exercise his core constitutional power of the presidential pardon to pardon all of his criminal associates who carry out his unlawful commands. This is not just absolute presidential power. It is absolute presidential power PLUS. And like Dred Scott, Korematsu, and Plessy vs. Ferguson, this opinion must not stand.If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Former Rep Adam Kinzinger joins the group (plus Chris Cillizza) to discuss the Court's worst ruling since Korematsu, opening the door to God know what if Trump wins. Also, what would an open convention look like? Highlights / Lowlights: Mona: Are We in ‘Soviet America'? Not Even Close. By Cathy Young, The Bulwark Linda: Her trip to Israel, where she was recording. Adam: Cara Mund, a sincere Never Trump candidate who ran (and lost, but got 19%!) in North Dakota. Adam joined her on her radio show to discuss the state of the Republican Party Chris: Gabe Fleisher's Wake up to Politics. Gabe has been writing about politics since he was a child and is a politics prodigy. (Substack here) Go to TryMiracle.com/BEGTODIFFER and use the code BEGTODIFFER to claim your FREE 3 PIECE TOWEL SET and SAVE over 40% OFF Visit BetterHelp.com/begtodiffer today to get 10% off your first month.

This is our unabridged interview with Karen Korematsu. What is it like to be an Asian American? In light of the beginning of AAPI month, we present a re-airing of our episode from 2021 with Karen Korematsu and Eugene Cho, two Asian-Americans with unique stories of grief and hope. Karen Korematsu tells the story of her father Fred Korematsu, a famed Japanese-American civil rights activist who refused Franklin Roosevelt's executive order to report to what FDR himself called “a concentration camp” on American soil shortly after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Show Notes: Similar episodes Eugene Cho: Thou Shalt Not Be a Jerk Elise Hu: Obsessed with Beauty Resources mentioned this episode The Korematsu Institute PDF of Lee's Interview Notes - Karen Korematsu Transcript of Abridged Episode JOIN NSE+ Today! Our subscriber only community with bonus episodes, ad-free listening, and discounts on live shows Subscribe to episodes: Apple | Spotify | Amazon | Google | YouTube Follow Us: Instagram | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube Follow Lee: Instagram | Twitter Join our Email List: nosmallendeavor.com See Privacy Policy: Privacy Policy Amazon Affiliate Disclosure: Tokens Media, LLC is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

What is it like to be an Asian American? In light of the beginning of AAPI month, we present a re-airing of our episode from 2021 with Karen Korematsu and Eugene Cho, two Asian-Americans with unique stories of grief and hope. Karen Korematsu tells the story of her father Fred Korematsu, a famed Japanese-American civil rights activist who refused Franklin Roosevelt's executive order to report to what FDR himself called “a concentration camp” on American soil shortly after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Eugene Cho discusses his experiences as a Korean-born American immigrant, and how we might learn to love our neighbors in the face of political polarization and racial discrimination. Show Notes: Similar episodes Eugene Cho: Thou Shalt Not Be a Jerk Elise Hu: Obsessed with Beauty Resources mentioned this episode Thou Shalt Not Be a Jerk by Eugene Cho The Korematsu Institute PDF of Lee's Interview Notes - Eugene Cho PDF of Lee's Interview Notes - Karen Korematsu Transcription Link JOIN NSE+ Today! Our subscriber only community with bonus episodes, ad-free listening, and discounts on live shows Subscribe to episodes: Apple | Spotify | Amazon | Google | YouTube Follow Us: Instagram | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube Follow Lee: Instagram | Twitter Join our Email List: nosmallendeavor.com See Privacy Policy: Privacy Policy Amazon Affiliate Disclosure: Tokens Media, LLC is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Jonah invites Sarah onto The Skiff to grill her on her sociopathic “subtweet,” debate the ethics of killing dogs, and peer into the minds of anti-Israeli student protesters. But for the main course, the two argue about Trump's immunity case. Listeners' discretion is advised. Show Notes: —Sarah's solo AO episode —David's return to AO —Korematsu v. United States —Nick Catoggio's Boiling Frogs newsletter on Kristi Noem —Centennial Crisis: The Disputed Election of 1876 —Join The Dispatch for access to our exclusive Skiff feed Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Part three of our coverage of Japanese Internment during World War Two finds Jeananne continuing her interview with Angela Sutton, an Interpretative Ranger at Tule lake, one of the most infamous of the incarceration centers to get inside knowledge and more details of what went on in the camp. We get many details and a few stories, including first hand accounts retold by Ms. Sutton, as well as descriptions of the camp itself.  Jeananne then goes into what happened to the detainees after the camps closed. Japanese Americans were given $25 and a one-way train ticket to go and re-establish their lives.  A Supreme Court case which challenged the Constitutionality of Executive Order 9066 and Japanese Incarceration camps was Korematsu v The United States. More than 40 years after the war's end, President Ronald Reagan signed into law the Civil Liberties Act of 1988, which apologized to still-living Japanese Americans who had been held in the camps and ordered restitution of $20,000.  In 1998, Fred Korematsu was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton. After the terrorist attack on Sept. 11, 2001 when laws were passed that limited people's civil liberties, once again Fred Korematsu spoke out. He died on March 30, 2005. Listen to this podcast on how this went down and what exactly was involved. There is always more to learn, talk to y'all soon! Jimmy & Jean

Lochner v New York, a 1905 Supreme Court case about working hours and contracts, is considered anti-canon. Right up there with Dred Scott, Plessy and Korematsu. The question is, how did it get there? Why do people think it's so bad? And what does this decision, and the era that followed, say about politics and the Supreme Court?Our guides to this case and what came after are Rebecca Brown, Rader Family Trustee Chair in Law at USC Gould School of Law and Matthew Lindsay, Associate Professor of Law at University of Baltimore School of Law. CLICK HERE: Visit our website to donate to the podcast, sign up for our newsletter, get free educational materials, and more!

The Supreme Court during World War II issued some of the most notorious opinions in its history, including the Japanese exclusion case, Korematsu v. United States, and the Nazi saboteur military commission case, Ex parte Quirin. For a fresh take on these and related cases and a broader perspective on the Supreme Court during World War II, Jack Goldsmith sat down with Cliff Sloan, a professor at Georgetown Law Center and a former Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure, to discuss his new book, which is called “The Court at War: FDR, His Justices, and the World They Made.” They discussed how the Court's decisions during World War II were informed by the very close personal bonds of affection that most of the justices had with President Roosevelt and by the justices' intimate attachment to and involvement with the war effort. They also discussed the fascinating internal deliberations in Korematsu, Quirin, and other momentous cases, and the puzzle of why the same court that issued these decisions also, during the same period, issued famous rights-expanding decisions in the areas of reproductive freedom, voting rights, and freedom of speech.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Here are some historical events that occurred on December 18th:1620: The Mayflower landed at Plymouth Rock, Massachusetts, with Pilgrims aboard.1787: New Jersey became the third state to ratify the U.S. Constitution.1865: The 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified, abolishing slavery.1912: The Piltdown Man, later discovered to be a hoax, was announced by Charles Dawson, who claimed to have discovered the fossil in Sussex, England.1944: The Supreme Court of the United States upheld the wartime relocation of Japanese-Americans in the case of Korematsu v. United States.1973: The Islamic Conference, consisting of Muslim-majority countries, recognized the sovereignty of Bangladesh.1997: HTML 4.0 was published by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).2010: The Arab Spring protests continued with Mohamed Bouazizi's self-immolation in Tunisia, sparking widespread demonstrations and uprisings across the Arab world.These are just a few examples of historical events that happened on December 18th.Podcast Website:https://atozenglishpodcast.com/a-to-z-this-day-in-world-history-december-18th/Social Media:WeChat account ID: atozenglishpodcastFacebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/671098974684413/Tik Tok:@atozenglish1Instagram:@atozenglish22Twitter:@atozenglish22A to Z Facebook Page:https://www.facebook.com/theatozenglishpodcastCheck out our You Tube Channel:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCds7JR-5dbarBfas4Ve4h8ADonate to the show: https://app.redcircle.com/shows/9472af5c-8580-45e1-b0dd-ff211db08a90/donationsRobin and Jack started a new You Tube channel called English Word Master. You can check it out here:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2aXaXaMY4P2VhVaEre5w7ABecome a member of Podchaser and leave a positive review!https://www.podchaser.com/podcasts/the-a-to-z-english-podcast-4779670Join our Whatsapp group: https://forms.gle/zKCS8y1t9jwv2KTn7Intro/Outro Music: Daybird by Broke for Freehttps://freemusicarchive.org/music/Broke_For_Free/Directionless_EP/Broke_For_Free_-_Directionless_EP_-_03_Day_Bird/https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcodehttps://freemusicarchive.org/music/Scott_Joplin/Piano_Rolls_from_archiveorg/ScottJoplin-RagtimeDance1906/https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/the-a-to-z-english-podcast/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

On this day in legal history, October 11, 1872, Chief Justice Harlan Stone was born – but he wasn't born the Chief Justice. He was appointed much later when he was an adult. Harlan Fiske Stone was an American jurist who served as an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1925 to 1941 and then as the 12th Chief Justice of the United States from 1941 until his death in 1946. Born on October 11, 1872, in Chesterfield, New Hampshire, Stone was initially a law professor and later the dean at Columbia Law School. He was appointed by President Calvin Coolidge to the Supreme Court and was later elevated to Chief Justice by Franklin D. Roosevelt.One of Stone's significant contributions to American jurisprudence came in the case of International Shoe Co. v. Washington (1945). In this landmark decision, the mere name of which gives anyone who attended law school hives, Stone formulated the "minimum contacts" test, which has become a cornerstone in the area of personal jurisdiction in civil cases. The ruling clarified the circumstances under which an out-of-state corporation could be subject to the jurisdiction of local courts, thereby modernizing jurisdictional rules to fit a growing national economy.Stone is perhaps best known for his "Footnote Four" in the landmark case of United States v. Carolene Products Co. (1938), which laid the groundwork for the modern tiers of judicial scrutiny and the protection of minority rights. He also authored the majority opinion in the case of United States v. Darby Lumber Co. (1941), which upheld the Fair Labor Standards Act and confirmed Congress's power to regulate labor conditions.Another case that drew significant attention during Stone's tenure was Korematsu v. United States (1944). Although Stone did not write the majority opinion, he was part of the court that upheld the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. This decision has been widely criticized for its stance on civil liberties and is often cited as a low point in the Court's history. Stone's own views on the case have been the subject of much scholarly debate, given his generally liberal leanings on civil rights issues.Stone was known for his judicial integrity and liberal jurisprudence, often siding with Justices Louis Brandeis and Benjamin Cardozo on progressive interpretations of the Constitution. His tenure as Chief Justice was marked by a number of key decisions that expanded civil liberties and federal power, shaping American constitutional law for generations to come.The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal from 12 Republican-led states challenging the Biden administration's estimates for the social cost of greenhouse gas emissions. The high court left in place a federal appeals court decision, stating that the states, led by Missouri, lacked the legal standing to sue as they hadn't suffered a concrete injury. The Biden administration's estimates are intended to guide federal agencies in assessing the climate impact of various projects and in formulating new regulations. These estimates could influence a wide range of sectors, including oil and gas, agriculture, and construction. The decision follows a previous Supreme Court action that blocked an attempt to reinstate former President Trump's less stringent cost-estimation policy.Supreme Court Rejects GOP-Led States on Biden Climate EstimatesThe U.S. Supreme Court has chosen not to review the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) decision to reject Avail Vapor's application for marketing flavored e-cigarettes. Avail Vapor had argued that the FDA altered its application process for new tobacco products at the last minute, leading to a 99% rejection rate for e-cigarette applications. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit had previously sided with the FDA, stating that Avail failed to demonstrate that its products offered benefits to adults that outweighed the risks to young people. Avail contends that many adult smokers use e-cigarettes as a quitting aid. FDA Win on Flavored E-Cigarettes Won't Be Undone by JusticesIn an unusual legal move, Judge Jerry E. Smith of the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit added what he called the "opinion that should have been issued" to his dissent in a death penalty case. The majority decision had maintained a pause on a Texas man's scheduled execution, a decision Smith labeled as "grave error." Instead of elaborating on his dissent, Smith attached an opinion styled as a majority ruling, even including the names of the other two judges on the panel. Texas prosecutors later cited Smith's opinion in their request to the Supreme Court to proceed with the execution, which was subsequently granted.Legal experts have noted that this approach is atypical. Tad Bartlett, an attorney who has reviewed all of the Fifth Circuit's decisions over the past three years, said he had never seen a dissenting opinion formatted this way. He speculated that Smith's opinion might have initially been a draft that became a dissent when it was clear he didn't have the majority support. Given the expedited nature of death penalty cases, Smith may have retained the original formatting to save time.The majority ruling indicated that another judge on the panel, Judge James E. Graves Jr., would issue his own concurring opinion, which was later included in an amended majority opinion. Stacy Rogers Sharp, an adjunct professor at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law, warned that Smith's unusual approach could blur the lines between what is or is not the law, potentially undermining the majority opinion.Fifth Circuit Judge Adds Alternate Majority Opinion to Dissent (2)Legal experts predict that the U.S. Supreme Court may narrow or even overturn the Chevron Doctrine, a precedent that has significantly shaped the modern administrative state. The doctrine, established in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, allows courts to defer to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes. Bertrall Ross, a law professor, suggests that the Court is also likely to use the major questions and non-delegation doctrines to further limit agency power. A ruling that diminishes Chevron deference would require courts to interpret statutes more frequently and could create additional legislative work for Congress.Professor Allison Orr Larsen believes that the Court may limit Chevron deference to cases involving "genuine ambiguities" in statutory text. Ross adds that Congress might have to revisit statutes regularly if agencies can't resolve ambiguities. He also notes that the Court's recent decisions indicate a preference for major political issues to be handled by Congress rather than agencies. Meaghan VerGow, a legal partner, points out that another case, SEC v. Jarkesy, raises questions about the president's ability to remove administrative law judges, which could potentially create due process issues.Avid fans of Minimum Competence will remember we did a special Max Min episode on both Chevron Deference and the Major Questions Doctrine. Expect Narrowing of Chevron Doctrine, High Court Watchers SayThe fraud trial of Sam Bankman-Fried, related to the collapse of his FTX cryptocurrency exchange, is set to continue with further testimony from Caroline Ellison, a key witness and former co-head of Bankman-Fried's hedge fund, Alameda Research. Ellison has already testified that she was part of a multi-billion-dollar conspiracy led by Bankman-Fried to defraud FTX customers, investors, and lenders. She is among three former insiders who have pleaded guilty to fraud and are cooperating with prosecutors. Ellison revealed that the hedge fund used about $10 billion in FTX customer funds to repay debts and make investments.She also stated that Bankman-Fried, who is her former boss and occasional romantic partner, was indifferent to the risks associated with Alameda's lending and investment strategies. Prosecutors allege that Bankman-Fried misused billions in customer funds to support Alameda, purchase real estate, and donate over $100 million to U.S. political campaigns. Bankman-Fried has pleaded not guilty to the charges, arguing that while he made mistakes, he did not intend to steal funds.In his opening statement, defense lawyer Mark Cohen urged jurors to question the credibility of cooperating witnesses like Ellison, suggesting they might be reinterpreting past decisions to appear more nefarious. Gary Wang, FTX's former technology chief, also testified that Bankman-Fried falsely claimed FTX was stable as it faced a surge in withdrawal demands. The trial, which could last up to six weeks, is also expected to feature testimony from another cooperating witness, former FTX engineering chief Nishad Singh.Sam Bankman-Fried's trial to resume with more testimony from Caroline Ellison | Reuters Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

On Sundays this summer, we're bringing you some of our favorite episodes from the archives. We'll continue to do new episodes on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Happy summer! /// It's August 31st. This day in 1942, a judge upholds the arrest of a Japanese-American man named Fred Korematsu. Jody, Niki, and Kellie discuss how Korematsu tried to resist the detention of Japanese-Americans in the wake of Pearl Harbor, and the legal battles that broke out after the Roosevelt administration moved hundreds of thousands of people to concentration camps along the west coast. This Day In Esoteric Political History is a proud member of Radiotopia from PRX. Your support helps foster independent, artist-owned podcasts and award-winning stories. If you want to support the show directly, you can do so on our website: ThisDayPod.com Get in touch if you have any ideas for future topics, or just want to say hello. Our website is thisdaypod.com Follow us on social @thisdaypod Our team: Jacob Feldman, Researcher/Producer; Brittani Brown, Producer; Khawla Nakua, Transcripts; music by Teen Daze and Blue Dot Sessions; Julie Shapiro, Executive Producer at Radiotopia

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit nealkatyal.substack.comThis episode is like a matter-anti matter explosion. Regina Spektor is one of the deepest and most thoughtful humans on the planet, and one of the most talented musicians to boot. Her music can bring you to tears with its celebration of life and emotion. She and I discuss one of the lowest points for the Supreme Court in recent memory, Hawaii v. Trump, where the Supreme Court upheld Trump's severe restrictions on countries that were overwhelmingly Muslim. Paid subscribers on nealkatyal.substack.com will have access to the full written materials around the decision (including a short summary) along with some bonus material from the interview with Regina.On December 7, 2015 (note the date), candidate Donald Trump called for "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.” 5 days into his Administration, he implemented it, leading to mass protests at airports.That travel ban got struck down by the Courts. Trump created a new one. That one got struck down by courts. Trump created another one. And that third one is the one that went to the Supreme Court.The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Roberts, upheld the third ban. Chief Justice Roberts found that the ban was constitutional, arguing that it neither exceeded the executive power of the Presidency nor violated the First Amendment. Justice Breyer issued a dissent examining the Proclamation's system of waivers and exemptions. In her more dissent, Justice Sotomayor rebuffed Roberts' argument, connecting then-candidate Trump's Islamophobic rhetoric to the ensuing travel ban and suggesting parallels to the Japanese internment cases. While the ban only lasted for four years, its impact was enormous; families were separated, dreams were crushed, and perhaps most disturbingly, the Court set a dangerous legal precedent. To me, as I wrote about in Yale Law Journal, it was a resurrection of the Korematsu case, where the Court upheld the Japanese American internment on grounds of national security. (Please keep in mind, I argued the Hawaii case in the Supreme Court and the lower courts, and have strong feelings, and some good stories I share here.). I have always felt the Supreme Court got Korematsu wrong, but part of the blame rests with the Solicitor General at the time, who lied to the Supreme Court.Regina, herself a refugee, is the perfect guest to discuss the human impact of a decision like Trump v Hawaii. I can't wait for you to listen in, for what she says about the promise of America is so moving.Paid subscribers will have access to all the written materials and summary of the decision, along with a bonus episode discussing Regina's tips for overcoming stage fright. Sign up at nealkatyal.substack.com

Editor: Recently, 83 Republicans, including our Monica De La Cruz, voted “no” to a measure that would have done much to rectify the damage done by the vaccine mandates to the airline industry. Chief among them would be to direct airlines to re-hire the pilots who refused the jab. Why on earth would they do that? To illustrate this, we can look at the internment of Japanese in World War II — a horrible blot on our history. The SCOTUS in three cases: Minoru Yasui v U.S., Hirabayashi v U.S., and Korematsu v U.S., affirmed the legality of what is...Article Link

lovethylawyer.comA transcript of this podcast is available at lovethylawyer.com.https://www.minamitamaki.com/attorneys/daleminami/Wikipedia Link:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dale_MinamiDale Minami is recognized as one of the top personal injury lawyers in the San Francisco Bay Area. He was selected as a Super Lawyer for each year from 2004 through 2023 in the Personal Injury category, one of the Top 100 Super Lawyers for Northern California in 2005 and from 2007 to 2023, and in the Top Ten Super Lawyers in the Personal Injury Category from 2013 through 2018.He was also named to the Best Lawyers of America list for nine straight years from 2014-2022 by Best Lawyers, recognized four times as one of the 500 Best Lawyers in America by Lawdragon Magazine (2005, 2014, 2015, 2018), and in the top 3% of attorneys in the nation by The Legal News.In 2019, Mr. Minami was honored with the ABA Medal, the American Bar Association's highest honor. He is the first Asian American to receive the award in its 90-year history.He has been involved in significant litigation involving the civil rights of Asian Pacific Americans and other minorities, such as Korematsu v. United States, a lawsuit to overturn a 40-year-old conviction for refusal to obey exclusion orders aimed at Japanese Americans during World War II, originally upheld by U.S. Supreme Court.Mr. Minami's advice to a new attorney:“I would advise a new attorney to find a mentor, someone with experience, knowledge, wisdom and willingness to help you grow.  A mentor will shortcut the learning process and accelerate your development of skills.  I was too dense and perhaps diffident to ask for help but if I were to do it all over again, I would be more assertive in finding someone and asking for help.  I realized later in my career that so many attorneys are willing to help younger attorneys if they were just asked.” Please subscribe and listen. Then tell us who you want to hear and what areas of interest you'd like us to cover.   Louis Goodman www.louisgoodman.comhttps://www.lovethylawyer.com/510.582.9090Music: Joel Katz, Seaside Recording, MauiTech: Bryan Matheson, Skyline Studios, OaklandAudiograms: Paul Roberts louis@lovethylawyer.com

"By virtue of the authority vested in me as President of the United States ... I hereby authorize and direct the Secretary of War and the Military Commanders ... to prescribe military areas … from which any or all persons may be excluded," - Executive Order No. 9066, Feb. 12, 1942~~~Two months after Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed an executive order permitting the military to remove anyone it wanted from designated "military areas." By this authority, 120,000 Japanese Americans were taken from their homes and put in military prison camps for the duration of the war. Historical consultant Paul Sparrow, a former Director of the Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum in Hyde Park, New York, discusses the arguments for and against this policy, why FDR implemented it, and what life was like for the tens of thousands of innocent civilians caught up in order 9066.Support the show

In this episode of Life Curious Women, host Ashley Nadine Lopez interviews Misasha Suzuki Graham, a graduate of Harvard College and Columbia Law School, she has been a practicing litigator for over 15 years, and is passionate about diversity, equity and inclusion in the legal profession as well as in her communities. She is a facilitator, writer, and speaker regarding issues of racial justice, especially with regards to children, the co-author of Dear White Women: Let's Get (Un)comfortable Talking About Racism, and the co-host of Dear White Women. Misasha, who is biracial (Japanese and White), is married to a Black man, and is the proud mom of two very active multiracial young boys. We get into: Her experience being biracial in this country led her to an interest in identity and justice. How reading the Supreme Court decisions in the Korematsu case led her to studying law. What inspired her and her co-founder/best friend to start the Dear White Women platform. Her experience being in white environments and passing by being biracial. Learning what was being said when white women thought there were no women of color in the space. How starting Dear White Women began as a way to help white women use their privilege to uproot systemic racism without centering themselves in the process. The importance of having difficult conversation about race and being anti-racist. Looking at racism as a systemic issue rather than an individual issue. Advice on how to start the uncomfortable conversations with adults and children. Follow Dear White Women on Instagram @DearWhiteWomenPodcast Check out Dear White Women online www.DearWhiteWomen.com -------------------------------------------------- Follow Life Curious Women on Instagram @LifeCuriousWomen Follow our host Ashley Nadine Lopez on Instagram @AshleyNadineLopez Don't forget to subscribe and sign up for our newsletter by DM'ing us on Instagram! --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/ashley-nadine-lopez/support

A weekly magazine-style radio show featuring the voices and stories of Asians and Pacific Islanders from all corners of our community. The show is produced by a collective of media makers, deejays, and activists Tonight on APEX Express it is A Time for Remembering. We are remembering what it is like to grow up in San Francisco and be connected to this land that is not ours. We are remembering the incarceration of 120,000 Japanese Americans and Japanese Latin Americans. We Are talking with artists and lawyers and policy makers. People who help us shape our vision of what it means to be American. Host Miko Lee talks with artists Celi Tamayo-Lee and Na Omi Judy Shintani and Lawyer Don Tamaki. Join us.   Muni Raised Me February 24–April 9, 2023 Opening Reception, SOMArts Cultural Center Artist NaOmi Shintani's website The Art of Resilience: Tanforan Exhibit Tours, Panel Discussion & Memorial Walk through February 25, 2023 1-4PM PST San Bruno BART Station & AZ Gallery, San Bruno, CA & Online ongoing exhibit on the exterior plaza and inside the San Bruno BART Station.   Day of Remembrance San Francisco, February 19, 2023, 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM PST Tickets here. StopRepeatingHistory.Org   Additional information about the Cal Reparations Task Force It convened in June of 2021, and on June 1, 2022, fulfilled its first charge of publishing a sweeping, nearly 500 page report drawing a through line from the harm of 246 years of slavery, 90 years of Jim Crow and racial terror, and decades more of continuing discrimination. Here is link to  the 29 page Executive Summary, https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/ab3121-interim-report-executive-summary-2022.pdf   Show Transcripts: A Time for Remembering [00:00:35] Miko Lee: Tonight on apex express. It is a time for remembering. We are remembering what it is like to grow up in San Francisco and be connected to this land that is not ours. We are remembering the incarceration of 120,000 Japanese Americans and Japanese Latin Americans. We are talking with artists and lawyers, policymakers, people who help us shape our vision of what it means to be American. Hi, I'm your host, Miko Lee. And tonight on apex express I speak with artists Celi Tamayo-Lee and Na Omi Judy Shintani and lawyer Don Tamaki join us aboard apex express Welcome to Apex Express, Celi Tamayo-Lee . [00:01:19] Celi Tamayo-Lee: Thank you for having me, Miko. [00:01:21] Miko Lee: We're so happy to have you as an artist, as a community organizer. So my first question for you is, who are your people and what legacy do you carry with you? [00:01:32] Celi Tamayo-Lee: My people are creatives. people who like to eat a lot. My lineage comes from ELOs Norte in the Philippines, in the province of La Wag and also from Toisan in village, Sega, which is, in the Guandong province in China. My people love to dance. My people are nature lovers, ocean lovers, and those who wanna figure out what it fights to get to liberation. I carry with me legacies. Of deep hope and deep faith and legacies of adventuring. I think a lot about both my grandmothers, my Popo June and my Lola Anisha, who were just both very. Revolutionary in my mind, for their times. My grandmother from the Philippines coming here, from her small village, having I think just a high school degree and making a life for herself and her family in San Francisco. My other grandmother, June, who was a housewife in Palo Alto, who I think otherwise would have become a doctor, had higher education been m ore accessible for, women in her time. I think both of them were just really loving women , who hosted a lot of open space for their communities through their food, through gatherings and parties and also being a safe place for many of our relatives in the United. [00:03:09] Miko Lee: Thank you for that. I often think about my Popo who had all this power and imagination and what it would be like if she was living today. Do you feel like you carry an additional, , responsibility to fulfill some of their dreams since they could not during their time. [00:03:28] Celi Tamayo-Lee: Yeah. I think about that a lot. I think in the moments where I'm like, wow, I have just sat at a table all day on my computer. Is this what my ancestors dreamt for me? But I think especially as I have been exploring more of my gender identity. I think I identify as a non-binary person and I think that might be something that they couldn't quite, imagine in, in the language and the terms that they knew. But I think that like real freedom to express one's within their body and how they express themselves outwardly is definitely something I think they dreamt for me and. I also feel a responsibility to be a part of movement work and be a part of continuing to build community because that is something that I've benefited so much from them. [00:04:22] Miko Lee: Talk a little bit more about your community organizing and how you combine that with your artistry and your imagination. [00:04:28] Celi Tamayo-Lee: It's definitely been a journey for myself to identify as an artist and I think, mostly cuz there's so many messages about the ways in which art will never be a career path because of how dicey it is in terms of making money, in many ways, ironically, shout out my parents, who were both very creative people and also, people who have fought for social justice for most of their lives. my dad is a civil rights attorney and was a community organizer as a young person, but also, A musician and has always played in bands as a fun side gig. when he was my age, he was in a band called Stand that would perform all over the Bay Area. And my mom herself is also a cook and just a very creative person made all my Halloween costumes growing up and as an avid gardener. Having parents like that gave me just permission to continue to grow myself in a creative way. And I do think throughout so much of history movements have really succeeded because of their artistic aspects. Even within our Asian American history, there are so many important graphic designers and artists who made protest posters. Made movement graphics that really called into being like the spirit , of what people were fighting for. , I think about all of the songs that were sung throughout the Civil Rights movement and, I think culture just has a really powerful way of opening people's minds up to things that may feel out. reach when they're thinking in a more rational way. I just think that any movement that we need, is gonna depend on the way in which culture has been influenced through art. [00:06:25] Miko Lee: And speaking of that, you've been in the studio at Soma all day today, setting up a new exhibit called Muni Raised Me. Can you tell us about your latest project? [00:06:35] Celi Tamayo-Lee: This project called Muni Raised Me is a exhibit that will be in Soma Arts for six weeks, and it is a part of their curatorial residency programs. So myself and two of my really good friends, Sasha Vu and Mei Mei Lee, we saw the flyer on Instagram that they were calling for proposals and, , applied with this idea of a show called Muni Raised Me. really what It is, is, a love letter, a gathering, a dance party of so many of our friends, our talented friends who are. Visual artists, painters, collage artists, fashion designers, photographers it's really a space that we actually wanted to create for a long time, but never really found the platform to do it. And so much of it is trying to. ,I think juxtapose like the beauty and the roots that we come from having grown up in San Francisco while also naming just the struggle it has been to persist and live here. ,most of us artists were born in the early nineties and have just come of age in this tech era within San Francisco. 2011 was when Mayor Ed Lee invited tech companies like Twitter and Google and LinkedIn in with these major tax breaks. From 2009 to 2013, every time that I visited home, There were just more and more beloved businesses that had been replaced by condos and replaced by fancy coffee shops selling $6 lattes. For myself and for many of my friends it's been a painful and lonely experience to try and maintain a life here and to, make rent, to feel creative, to still work in public service. So many of the artists in our show are organizers themselves, or are teachers and educators in public schools or in afterschool programs. And so to try and live all those different multiple dreams and identities is really a struggle in San Francisco. [00:08:53] Miko Lee: So when somebody walks into Soma Arts, what will they see with Muni raised me. [00:08:58] Celi Tamayo-Lee: Ooh. I will say one of the first things they will see is a Muni bus that we were actually gifted from SFMTA. It just so happened that they were retiring a number of their buses and we got connected to the right person. , shout out Nicole Christian who knew somebody and. We have transformed that bus into an altar. You can walk through the bus, and throughout the bus there will be altars, but there will be definitely a focal point at the very back of the bus for people to view, but also for people to interact with. I think that so much of living in the city and having grown up in the city is an experience of grief and we really wanted to make space in the show for people to bring in ancestors and bring in family members who have been lost, , or, even family members who have been pushed out of the Bay Area. we also wanna commemorate lives lost to police violence. yeah, We hope that altar can be, a realm in which the spirit is felt beyond just , the material setting of a gallery. There's also gonna be a lot of amazing collage work from Erin Kimora. We have a beautiful installation from Arena Alejo, along with, Alyssa Avilas, who is a painter and multidisciplinary artist. People will just see a lot of kind of iconography from the nineties. We have a couple of painted Muni passes and a lot of, yeah, just different gestures and shout outs to this public transportation system that I know for myself, I spent hours and hours of my life on. It was a little bit of a pocket of freedom, like with my parents not necessarily knowing where I was. It wasn't home, it wasn't school. It was a place where I got to just enjoy and see my city. [00:11:02] Miko Lee: And What would you like folks to feel after they leave the show? [00:11:06] Celi Tamayo-Lee: I hope that they leave feeling reminded that San Francisco is them and that any kind of beauty or spark or funkiness or weirdness that they feel themselves missing from San Francisco actually can come back through their own creativity, through their own hello to a neighbor through their own small act of kindness. You know, I think there are deeper relationships also made through this show. I hope that there's a feeling of oh, my people are still here. I am connected to a sense of justice and community that maybe doesn't always feel present in the everyday, but is actually there. I hope that it. Reignites some sense of connectedness to other people who call this place home. [00:11:59] Miko Lee: I wonder if you could just speak a little bit about how art helps us remember the past so that we can learn and move forward in the future. [00:12:08] Celi Tamayo-Lee: Yeah, I think art is really critical to remembering our history. It's definitely one thing to read something in a book and another thing to experience it through imagery and sound and color. it was important to us in this exhibit to in our alter space, include really important historical figures of San Francisco. So we're including people like Victoria Manalo Draves who was a Filipina American olympic swimmer, she was one of the first women swimmers to win in her divisions of diving. We also have people like Mary Ellen Pleasant, who was an African-American woman, one of the first African-American millionaires in the country, who is also dubbed as the Harriet Tubman of the West. She helped hundreds of African-American people, basically find and make lives here in San Francisco. And, She challenged the government when they told her that she couldn't ride actually on a certain part of the public transportation, and it went to the California Supreme Court and she won and that is what stopped discrimination on the trolley routes in San Francisco. Art reaches people who would not normally seek out that history. I think it just gives people a much deeper sense of their own legacies or legacies that they may not even know that they're connected to. [00:13:51] Miko Lee: Celi Tamayo-Lee, thank you so much for joining us on Apex Express. [00:13:56] Celi Tamayo-Lee: Thank you for having me. Miko. For anyone who's looking for more information, you can follow us on Instagram@MuniRaisedMe and also find us online@somaarts.com/Muniraisedme. [00:14:10] Miko Lee: That was Sealy to Mio Lee talking about muni raised me. Now take a listen to pistol jazz by Hi no Tori. A taiko solo. [00:17:41] Miko Lee: Welcome back. You are tuned into apex express, a 94.1 KPFA and 89.3 KPF. Be in Berkeley and online@kpfa.org. That was a Taiko solo. Hi no Tori by pistol jazz. Welcome artist and narrator of culture, NaOmi Judy Shintani to Apex Express. [00:18:03] NaOmi Judy Shintani: Thank you for having me. I'm excited to talk with you. [00:18:06] Miko Lee: We're excited to talk with you too, and I wanna kick it off by first asking you, who are your people and what legacy do you carry with you? [00:18:16] NaOmi Judy Shintani: Well, I do quite a bit of my artwork about, the Japanese American history and so those are some of my people, I would say. But I also want my work to be visible to all kinds of people. So I'd say everyone's my people. The legacy I carry, part of that has to do with the incarceration, that is part of the history of my family. That is something that I carry with me. I think that there is intergenerational trauma. There's lessons you learn in legacy from your family and your culture. [00:18:54] Miko Lee: So we are coming along to the Day of Remembrance, which is a day that recognizes the Japanese-American incarceration. Can you tell about your family's personal connection with the incarceration. [00:19:07] NaOmi Judy Shintani: My father's family was up in Washington State in the Puget Sound area, and they lived on a houseboat and were oyster farmers. When Pearl Harbor was bombed, they immediately came and got my grandfather, who was a leader in the community. They were a concerned or worried that he might be a spy or might have information. And so He was taken away and my grandmother and my father's and his sibling didn't really know what had happened to him. A few days later they came for my grandmother and my father and his siblings. They eventually ended up at Tule Lake incarceration camp. Then my grandfather was allowed to be with the family there. On my mother's side, she was actually in Hawaii and the family was not incarcerated per se, though there's a lot of limitations and curfews that they had to live with. Her father was also a leader in the community and he was taken away for a year. And I think At that time my mother didn't really, probably up until the time of her death did not believe that they were incarcerated in Hawaii. But of course, we've learned later that there were incarceration camps in Hawaii and that my grandfather actually was incarcerated. [00:20:36] Miko Lee: Yeah, so many of these stories are hidden. Finally the one incarceration camp in Oahu is just getting turned into a, a national park soon. So More people will know about that history. That's one of the many hidden histories about the internment camps in Hawaii. [00:20:52] NaOmi Judy Shintani: Exactly. One of my goals is to explore the incarceration history in Hawaii. I've mostly been focused on my father's family cuz there's been more information. So I'm very interested in learning more about the legacy of trauma in Hawaii. [00:21:10] Miko Lee: You're an amazing artist, have created so many important pieces, and can you talk more about how you combine your sense of family history, your activism with your artistry? [00:21:22] NaOmi Judy Shintani: I think originally I started wanting to learn more about what happened to my family and also to come to grips with it for my own self. That's when I really started exploring trying to learn more, trying to Get my father to talk more about his experience and that is what really spurred me to start making art. At one point when we went to the Tule Lake pilgrimage together, he was asked how often do you think about the incarceration? It was a general question out to the elders that were at Tule Lake and they had to raise their hand and so they said every 10 years, every five years, every. Three years and they kept going and my father still had his hand raised for every day. And at that point I thought, this is something that is deep in our family, a deep trauma that's not been talked about a whole lot, and it has affected me and many families. That's when I really decided, Spend more time exploring that and exploring also meant doing research. It meant talking to other people. It meant gathering information. I did a lot of outreach to hear other people's stories written or oral. I also did surveys for descendants of people that were incarcerated cuz I hadn't heard that much from them. All of these thoughts and stories became part of my art and I think of my art as a way of educating people as well as honoring them honoring the people that were incarcerated and as a healing. [00:23:16] Miko Lee: In the byline next to your name, it says that you are a “narrator of culture, the unspoken compels me to create.” Can you share a little bit more about what that means to you? [00:23:27] NaOmi Judy Shintani: Well, I was thinking about what is it that I'm actually doing in my work and I was working with someone to come up with some sort of naming of myself, and I finally came up with the idea that I tell other people's stories, I tell stories of culture so that's why I became a narrator of culture. The unspoken compels me to create, that's because I am very Adamant about bringing these stories out to the public. I think that is through the personal stories about what people experienced. That is how we really know the history. A lot of this kind of history, these personal stories are not in history books in high school or middle school. It's about, Individuals and families. It's not just about, 120,000 people. I mean, that's a big number, but to hear the actual stories of parents and children and grandparents I think that puts a whole different light on it. [00:24:36] Miko Lee: Can you talk a little bit about your piece that's at the San Bruno BART station. [00:24:41] NaOmi Judy Shintani: I was hired by bay Area Rapid Transit Bart to create a art exhibit or historical exhibit about the Tanforan detention center that was on the land of where the BART station and the mall is now and was originally a racetrack. I came in as a curator, so I thought about what is important for people to know about Tanforan and how am I going to express that through writing and through art and through historical photographs. I actually thought that there's a lot of discrimination and hardships that Japanese immigrants, the Issei experience before. Pearl Harbor was bombed that I think had an influence on how the Japanese people were treated during that war time. So I really started talking about the history way earlier. About coming over, not being able to become citizens, not being able to own land and yet persevering and becoming successful. So that all rolled into the incarceration. There was a lot of discrimination because, the successfulness of the Japanese even though they had so many hardships. That was just an example of what things I thought were important for people to know about the incarceration, the history of Tanforan. I also spent a lot of time Expressing and telling the history of the artists that were at Tanforan art was a very important part of the incarceration. So I talked about people that were incarcerated, artists that were incarcerated, the art school they had there, and showed some of the art that was created there. and then I also included Art of Descendants. To express, you know, what's happened? How are people expressing the incarceration in art now. [00:26:48] Miko Lee: I love that you curated this kind of trauma informed practice that has been lasted for generations. Can you talk more about the art school that was at the Tanforan concentration camp? I hadn't heard that story before. [00:27:02] NaOmi Judy Shintani: Obata, who was a professor at uc, Berkeley was incarcerated. And so When he got there, he thought we have to have something that will give people some hope or some something to do while they're in prison. He had an art school that was for children as well as for adults. to Teach and encourage people to use their creativity to survive this difficult time. They had hundreds of students and a lot of different subjects as well as drawing and painting. [00:27:36] Miko Lee: So anybody can go and see this public exhibit that opened in September, right? [00:27:42] NaOmi Judy Shintani: Yes. If you want to go see it, you can of course you can ride on Bart and get off at the San Bruno BART station is, it's right on the main street level floor. If you're going by car, if you come to the Bart parking lot or the Tanforan Shopping Center, you can let the station agent know that you're there to see the exhibit. Then you'll be able to come in without having to buy a ticket. They're also encouraging classrooms and groups to come in. So you have a large group. You can call or email Bart and they will arrange that. There's also a memorial which is outside of the BART station, and that was put together by a group of Japanese Americans, some of which had connections with the incarceration there at Tanforan. They just opened a beautiful outdoor memorial, which has a statue of two of the young mochita girls that were in incarcerated photographed by Dorthea Lang. And also they have the names of the people that were . Incarcerated engraved, and they have a horse stable structure that can give you the size and the space that you would've been in if you were incarcerated there. BART and AAWAA, which is the Asian American Women's Arts Association are putting on a curatorial tour, as well as a memorial walkthrough and a multicultural artist panel on February 25th. People that wanna get more information can come have a special experience on that day. [00:29:26] Miko Lee: You're tuned into APEX express., a 94.1 K PFA and 89.3 KPFB in Berkeley and online@kpfa.org. Can you talk to me about your project that you're working on right now? [00:29:40] NaOmi Judy Shintani: Dream Refuge for Children imprisoned was originally introduced at the Triton Art Museum in Santa Clara. And it has since been traveling. It not only is about the Japanese incarceration, but I've also included children that were incarcerated in the United States, including native American children in boarding school situations that were removed from their communities and also the Central American refugee children which are the most recent group that has been incarcerated and a t the beginning were removed from their parents, and I just thought that was traumatic and horrible. It's reminded me so much of what our families went through in the incarceration of the Japanese Americans. [00:30:34] Miko Lee: Can you describe for listeners what this work looks like? [00:30:39] NaOmi Judy Shintani: I did life size drawings of children on mattresses are put onto cots. I also sewed talismans on each of the children. That represents a form of protection, a symbol of protection for the different children. So the Japanese Americans had little embroidery symbols as in Japan they would sew them on the back of children's kimonos to watch their back. I carried on that tradition of adding those kinds of symbols in red thread. For the native American children, I made little belt pouches of cedar and sage herbs that were given to me by a elder who knew I was working on this project. And so I sewed those into little red pouches that had the symbol of the four directions. For the Central American children I sewed purple crosses cuz they would often be carrying these crosses, with them when they came across the border. So those are all arranged in a circle. I just felt that the circle was such a healing shape and I wanted people to come into the space and see these sleeping children in this safe space and to relate to their experiences. And I had recordings of stories that were told by elders now about their experience when they were children. I had a woman that was in Native American boarding schools that told her stories and then also collected the stories. Belinda Arianga, a woman in Half Moon Bay that went to the border, and she told me the stories of those children. These voices were all recorded so that you can hear their stories in the room. [00:32:33] Miko Lee: So why for you as an artist, did you want to have both something that you could look at and then also listen to what was the impact of having those dual experiences for audience? What's your intention behind that? [00:32:46] NaOmi Judy Shintani: I really wanted people to experience the incarceration with different modalities. So I felt that by them seeing the children sleeping, they had one experience also walking in a circle. That was another experience. So they, there was a movement involved. To hear the stories I think gave another level and also to hear elders telling the stories that they remembered when they were children, along with hearing children speaking in Spanish and in English. And to have different ages and different genders. Telling the stories that they experienced. I think that just gave a whole nother. Way of the history entering the viewers. [00:33:32] Miko Lee: To me, there's also something quite powerful about the fact that they're sleeping children , because there's this whole innocence and kind of beauty that comes within that sleeping space, and yet they're held in detention. So it's this very intense juxtaposition. [00:33:51] NaOmi Judy Shintani: Yes. That was something that I really thought about and wanted to express that sort of vulnerability, but yet when they're sleeping, they have this time to dream of being in a different place or being in their own space. That was one of the things I really wanted people to come away with. The other thing I didn't talk about is that the Central American children I placed on the floor and they're sleeping among the Mylar blankets as well as textiles from Central America. And that really came to me when I spoke to a woman who was from Honduras who been released from those detention centers and she said whatever you do, don't put our children on beds, because they had to sleep on the cement floor. So I really took that to heart and wanted to show them in their correct plight of being imprisoned in such horrible conditions and the circle of the children around them. From the earlier generations of incarceration, I felt they were almost like guardians for the Central American children. [00:35:06] Miko Lee: And you went down to Crystal City to be part of the pilgrimage and protest, is that right? [00:35:12] NaOmi Judy Shintani: Yes. I was invited by Satsuki. Ina I wanted to talk to her about her story and about her experience. She said why don't you come along? We are going to go to Crystal City. It was the first time they were going. We're also gonna do a protest at the detention center. You can talk to a lot of people there. You can see what's happening I did talk to some families and children at the bus station that had been released when we were giving them some food and backpacks and things like that, and that was really moving and I think that actually that experience of going on that trip that sort of cemented the dream refuge for me. [00:35:56] Miko Lee: You mentioned your dad and how he kept his hand raised the whole time that he thought about the incarceration every day. Has he had the opportunity to see your work?. [00:36:05] NaOmi Judy Shintani: Yes, he has seen my work. He was very proud of it. He would often go to my art exhibits and be photographed with my work and Attend shows and I was always very happy to have him there and I think it was emotional for him. He didn't necessarily speak a lot, but he was present and I think it meant a lot to him that I was making work about his experience. [00:36:33] Miko Lee: Since we're coming up upon the day of Remembrance, how does art impact remembering and specifically about remembering about the Japanese incarceration? [00:36:44] NaOmi Judy Shintani: Well, I think it impacts it in a lot of ways. One way is that there were not a lot of cameras allowed into camp. A lot of the art that was created in camps are the only documentation, true documentation by the prisoners of what it was. To be there and how they were feeling and how they were experiencing camp. Mine Okubo's work, who I use in the Tanforan exhibition is really important because her drawings were almost the only thing I could find that showed just the. Experience of being in a horse stable, the experience of having to go to public bathrooms where people had no privacy. I mean, Those kinds of things weren't photographed by Dorothea Lang or any of the other photographers that were sent by the W R A because they were not trying to show the traumatic side of the incarceration. The fact that these artists were able to document and express themselves, that, that is, historically important and also important as a way of people understanding the emotional impact of what was going on in the camps. There's just something about a painting or a sculpture or drawing that shows such a deeper level of history it doesn't even have to be history, just the colors or the brush strokes. These are all things that you can't read about in a history book. You can't experience it in the same way. I also feel that with the descendants creating art for example, the Sansei Granddaughters is a collective I'm part of. We've all expressed our family's experience. in different ways some people are sewing, Rako Fuji, she uses glass to create kimonos with photographs. There's just different ways, that people use whatever media they think is right to express their history. [00:38:53] Miko Lee: Na Omi Shintani thank you so much for speaking with me. We're looking forward to seeing more of your artwork and your voice in the world. [00:39:01] NaOmi Judy Shintani: I really appreciate the opportunity to talk about the art and how important it is for our history in our education of this traumatic experience. I wanted to also make sure that people come to the carrying the light for Justice Bay area Day of Remembrance. Sunday, February 19th from two to four Pacific Standard Time, it's going to be at the Christ United Presbyterian Church on Sutter Street in San Francisco. In person or online. The keynote speakers can be Don Tamaki. There's gonna be spoken word performance by Lauren Ito the MCs Ryan Yamamoto, the anchor for C B s News Bay Area. And there'll be a candle candle lighting ceremony. It's always a very moving experience. It's a time for remembering and honoring those who've been incarcerated. It's a time of community and I hope people will attend. [00:40:05] Miko Lee: Welcome Don Tamaki, amazing esteemed lawyer and activist. Welcome to Apex Express. [00:40:11] Don Tamaki: Thank you. [00:40:11] Miko Lee: So first I wanna just start with the big question. Who are your people and what legacy do you carry with? [00:40:18] Don Tamaki: I'm part of the Japanese American community, I'm most known for serving on the legal team, which reopened Korematsu versus the United States. The 1944 US Supreme Court decision, widely regarded as one of the worst decisions in US Supreme Court history, our legal team reopened it some 37 years later. Newly discovered secret, intelligence reports and Justice Department memos admitting. There was no reason to lock up Japanese Americans. They were not a dangerous population. They were not engaging in espionage or sabotage , and arguments and memos between Justice Department lawyers about their legal duty and the fact that they were about to tell lies to the US Supreme Court in order to manipulate the outcome of that decision. That decision ended up in 1944 upholding the constitutionality of uprooting some 120,000 Americans of Japanese ancestry, including my parents and their extended families into 10 concentration camps, stretching from California to Arkansas. [00:41:26] Miko Lee: Wow. You've just given us a whole history lesson. Thank you so much. And you have been a part of so many critical moments in the Asian American Pacific Islander movement. You described part of that in the overturning of the Fred Korematsu 40 year conviction, but you're also the founder of Asian Law Alliance. And were the ED at Asian Law Caucus and you're the co-founder of Stop Repeating History all of your work is just so powerful and important. I wonder with the rise and attention on anti-Asian hate right now, where do you see the Asian-American movement going forward? [00:42:02] Don Tamaki: Well, I'm glad that all light is being shined on they hate incidents against Asian Americans. It has been happening for some time, but it's never really has gotten national attention let alone regional and local attention as it is now. So I think it's on balance. It's a good thing. On the other hand, I think we as Asian Americans knowing our history need to understand where the hate comes from in the first place. And by that I mean what is the cultural strain, the historical tradition, the norm of policies and laws that led to prejudice being so systemic in the first place. If you connect the dots, I think it does go back to 1619 in the very beginnings of enslavement in America, which laid the foundations propped up the institution of slavery for 246 years. 90 years of Jim Crow to follow, and decades more of exclusion and discrimination targeted first at black people. But while those policies and laws put a target on the backs of African-Americans it also Ended up targeting on occasion Asian Americans, Latinos other disfavored groups. And so this bias has really recycled over and over through our entire history. And from time to time resurfaces to impact us as Asian Americans. The Trump administration's a pretty good example where even though we have our model minority status Asian Americans became the spreaders of the Chinese virus. Mexicans were labeled as drug dealers and rapists. White supremacists declared that Jews and immigrants were poised to replace them. And the continuation of black people being killed at the hands of law enforcement, and it barely would ev evoke any reaction at all because it was deemed so normal until the May 25th, 2020 murder of George Floyd, which was captured on videotape. So this kind of thing where, you know, of course the Japanese Americans ended up in concentration camps. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was the first ban against a country. But it gets recycled in different forms, whether it's the 2017 Muslim ban that Trump put out or other things that ultimately in fact, the thinking I think, of the entire country including our own communities. While I'm very hardened that we're focusing on the hate incidents against Asian Americans, I think that's been a ignored area. I'm concerned about each group sticking up for its own tribe only and not connecting the dots I did to identify where this pathology comes from in the first. So speaking of cross solidarity work, I know your work led to the groundwork reparations for incarcerated Japanese Americans during World War ii, and last year you were appointed by Governor Newsom to a reparations task force for African Americans. Can you tell where that reparations committee is at right now? Following the murder of George Floyd triggering the largest protests in American. By September of the same year, 2020 the legislature had passed secretary Shirley will Webber's bill creating a task force to study reparations proposals for African Americans and make recommendations to the legislature. I'm one of nine members appointed by the governor in the legislature, and we have three charges. One is to document the harm of the legacy of slavery, covering two and a half centuries and another century of Jim Crow in decades, more of exclusion and discrimination, and connect those dots. To the current outcomes today, and we've done that in a very sweeping, scholarly, comprehensive report. It's been called the Interim report because it's not the final ones coming out this June. The second goal is to study reparations proposals and make recommendations to the legislature. The final report, which is due 2023 in just a few months. The third requirement is to educate the public about what's happened. Because as this is really, the subject is so buried and erased. The product of a willful amnesia call it. The fact that we're. The American public, the New York Times, Washington Post is just now publishing articles on Tulsa and Greenwood in which 300 African Americans were murdered in what was called a race riot, even though that happened over 100 years ago. People are just learning about that now. And what the I interim report that we issued last June reveals is that this is not an isolated incident. That the history is littered with Greenwood. Part about educating the public, creating curriculum to provide information to students and so on. That's really our charge going forward. And in June of 2023, we'll be issuing our final report. I know that both Tsuru for solidarity and the Japanese American Citizen League worked last year to get reparations for African Americans in the Chicago area utilizing marijuana tax. I'm wondering if there's other reparations models that have been happening in the US. There's discussion for the first time. The reparation idea is as old as the Civil War when 40 acres in a mule was promised with a period of 12 years of reconstruction that happened only to have all of that rescinded. Thereafter, and again, I think because of at least it was triggered, I think by the Floyd murder local municipalities and counties, about maybe two dozen or TA have taken this up in California so far as the only state and each of those areas are coming up with different kinds of proposals. I have to say that this is largely because of the unwillingness of Congress even to study reparations, let alone do anything about it. And so local jurisdictions have taken up the lead on this. As far as the state task force on reparations is concerned, I think all of the forms are on the table. None have been decided on yet or voted on. That will come in the run up to June of 2023. [00:48:54] Miko Lee: I believe you're the only non-African-American member of that commission. Is that right? [00:48:58] Don Tamaki: That is right. [00:49:00] Miko Lee: So how can the Japanese-American reparations and apology be utilized as a model for reparations for African-American and indigenous folks? [00:49:09] Don Tamaki: They're big differences, of course between the Japanese American experience and. The experience of black people in America. First off, as the listeners know, there's simply no equivalence between four to five years in the concentration camp, losing all of your property and your businesses. Some folks even lost their lives as compared to 400 years of two and a half centuries of enslavement followed by Jim Crow and. Legalized and customarily enforced segregation, the results of which we're seeing e every day in our communities. But there are some things that are useful. The Japanese American redress and reparations movement is maybe one of the very few examples where the government acknowledged a great, wrong, apologized for. and put meaningful compensation behind that to create a meaningful atonement and how we got there. Some of the, there are some lessons that are maybe of some use. I think the other thing in my role as the only non-black person on the task force is to demonstrate. We can and should, and we're obligated to be allies in this effort. And although Japanese Americans don't have the history of black Americans in America we do know something about racial profiling. We know something about being removed and vilified and organizing to get back our dignity and some measure of atonement and. that lesson is really an American story of the meaning of the Constitution and what it means to be an American. When democracy and institutions are being challenged and in our case failed. I think with respect to other groups, whether they're. Native people or Latinos or L G B T Q, populations, disabled and so on. We all ought to be taking a look at reparations because it shines a light on so much of where the sense of separation and inequality comes from in the first place. [00:51:17] Miko Lee: Can you talk to us about the Day of Remembrance? I know you're gonna be the keynote speaker this year. Can you talk about the importance of the day? of remembrance? [00:51:25] Don Tamaki: Well, It's certainly important from a personal standpoint for our own community. It's time to reflect on our families who were taken away and incarcerated for no good reason but for the country, it's important to memorialize, and we do this annually about the perils to democracy. When racism shouts louder than the Constitution and our community endured a time where, The facts didn't matter. The law didn't matter and the constitution didn't matter. And why is that important? Because we're seeing that play out in real time today. The January 6th Capitol insurrection the Capitol was defied, five people died. 25,000 troops were deployed to protect the peaceful transfer of power. and millions today believe the election was stolen despite the utter lack of any evidence of fraud that would've made any difference in the outcome. This kind of collapse is something our own community experienced. literally the three branches of government failed. The presidency, legislative branch, Congress, and in our case, the courts they all bowed to the will of a racist notion knowing, and the government knew it at the time that that was. A, a completely false premise and yet no one had the courage to stand up, at least within the Department of Justice and within the courts. It was so normal that it was allowed to happen. We're seeing this playbook play out. It's not peculiar to the United States. This demagoguery is something that's happening worldwide and the elements are the same, which is, number one, appeal to prejudice. Number two, engage in fear mount mongering and scapegoating and three traffic in conspiracy theories and fake news. There's certainly a parallel there And that also led to the formation of stop repeating history. To be an alert, to be a point of reflection that we've seen this before and unless we become active and intervene, it's gonna happen over and over again. So that's certainly. A big reason why the day of remember it is such an important annual event. [00:53:41] Miko Lee: How does it feel to be the keynote speaker this year? [00:53:44] Don Tamaki: Well, I've gotten more than my share of recognition. There are many other people that have done really important work, but it gives me a platform at least to talk about the importance of reparations for African Americans and why it is not just a black issue, but an issue of long overdue justice. And that by shining a light on the origins of systems of exclusion, discrimination, that it helps all of us. It gives me an opportunity to connect some of the dots between our community struggle and that which been a constant for black people in America. [00:54:20] Miko Lee: We're gonna put a link to stop repeating history onto the show notes so people can take a deeper dive into some of your work. Don, you make change happen through policy and laws, and we're also talking with artists in this episode. How do you think art can help shape and change social issues? [00:54:38] Don Tamaki: As a lawyer, I used to think that laws and cases and legal action are the most important thing. And don't get me wrong it's, important. We reopened this ancient case of Korematsu versus United States, and we made a legal point as well as a public policy point. But I think the driving force For both good and bad in America, which is an amalgamation of both is culture and what I mean to say that is to say, if the culture says you will be locked up, the laws don't matter. The constitution doesn't matter. Nothing matters. You will be locked up because the culture is saying that is the norm. and I think we're again seeing this over and over again. And so how is culture created these belief systems? A lot of it has to do with artists authors those who create. that reflect and help shape the public's values. I think Artists and writers and others play a huge role in determining or helping to determine the values of a society. In the reparations movement, as well as to happen in the Japanese American redressing, reparations. the Art was really important when we went to announce our reopening of the filing of the petition in behalf of Fred Korematsu, Gordon Hirabayshi and Minori Yasui, I called up news desks and these are educated journalists who had no idea that this had even happened in America. When I talked about American style concentration camps, they said you're talking about Japanese prisoners of war, aren't you? And they said, no, these are the removal and incarceration of an entire American population. They had not heard about that. Since that time, there've been so many books and movies and creative works and art. After how many years later Now it's in the public consciousness. People generally on both sides of the aisle, now regard this roundup is really bad idea of real travesty and an injustice. I'm glad that we played a legal role in all that. But how did the script get flipped? That was because of education. So the impact of documentary films, of books, of magazine articles, played a huge role in moving the needle of public opinion. and I think that's been true of every movement especially in the modern era. I think the artists are crucial. [00:57:07] Miko Lee: Don Tamaki, thank you so much for speaking with us. We look forward to hearing your keynote speech at the San Francisco Day of Remembrance. [00:57:15] Don Tamaki: Thank you, Miko. [00:57:16] Miko Lee: Thank you so much for joining us. Please check out our website, kpfa.org backslash program, backslash apex express to find out more about the show tonight and to find out how you can take direct action. We thank all of you listeners out there. Keep resisting, keep organizing, keep creating and sharing your visions with the world. Your voices are important. Apex express is produced by Miko Lee Jalena Keane-Lee and Paige Chung and special editing by Swati Rayasam. Thank you so much to the KPFA staff for their support have a great night. The post APEX Express – 2.16.23 – A Time for Remembering appeared first on KPFA.

In this case from 1944 the Court decides that arresting someone on "suspicion of being Japanese" and putting them in a concentration camp is not racially motivated. And while we're at it, don't call it a "concentration camp," that makes the justices feel icky.5 to 4 is presented by Prologue Projects. Rachel Ward is our producer. Leon Neyfakh and Andrew Parsons provide editorial support. Our production manager is Percia Verlin. Our website was designed by Peter Murphy. Our artwork is by Teddy Blanks at Chips NY, and our theme song is by Spatial Relations.Follow Peter (@The_Law_Boy), Rhiannon (@AywaRhiannon) and Michael (@_FleerUltra) on Twitter. You can follow the show on Twitter and Instagram @fivefourpod.Our email is fivefourpod@gmail.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In 1944, the Supreme Court upheld the wartime internment of Japanese-Americans. It's the first time the court applied strict scrutiny to racial discrimination by government. Over the protests of three justices, the Court held in Korematsu v. United States that the Roosevelt Administration met that exacting standard. One of the dissenters lamented, “Racial discrimination … […]

In 1944, the Supreme Court upheld the wartime internment of Japanese-Americans. It's the first time the court applied strict scrutiny to racial discrimination by government. Over the protests of three justices, the Court held in Korematsu v. United States that the Roosevelt Administration met that exacting standard. One of the dissenters lamented, “Racial discrimination … has no justifiable part whatever in our democratic way of life.” Nearly 75 years later, the court would explain that ruling “was gravely wrong the day it was decided” and “has been overruled in the court of history.” What is Korematsu's legacy and how is it casting an influence on the court today? Thanks to our guests John Q. Barrett and John Yoo. To learn more, check out KOREMATSU VERSUS US, a documentary short produced by the Federalist Society that explores the facts, conviction, and following cases surrounding Fred Korematsu and the other 120,000 "relocated" immigrants and citizens during World War II at https://fedsoc.org/commentary/videos/korematsu-versus-usFollow us on Twitter @ehslattery @anastasia_esq @pacificlegal #DissedPod Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Audiobook Break is proud to present the Japanese American Civil Liberties Collection from L.A. Theatre Works. In our season's final episode, we are featuring a discussion with playwright Jeanne Sakata and four of the attorneys from the Korematsu v. United States case portrayed in FOR US ALL: Lori Bannai, Peter Irons, Dale Minami, and Don Tamaki. Read the full AudioFile review of FOR US ALL at our website. Learn more about our Audiobook Break podcast, and discover daily audiobook recommendations on the Behind the Mic podcast. Visit latw.org for more information on these stunning audio plays. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode covers some of the background of the Japanese internments camps in America during WWII and info on the case of Fred Korematsu. While shortened, it does give some insight into the situation Japanese Americans were placed during this turbulent time. MISSING:::: ANIYA L BROWN, 17 years old, reported missing on 03/07/22. If you have any information regarding the whereabouts of at (253) 931-3080. Fred Korematsu Sources: https://www.aclunc.org/blog/exploring-aclu-news-archive-korematsu-v-united-states?gclid=Cj0KCQjw1bqZBhDXARIsANTjCPIkyX93kzkejhqODefYqI3HVHyGh9kxSfU8ViAfhwsv1_aEN5FSjCoaAqquEALw_wcB Exploring the ACLU News Archive: Korematsu v. United States | ACLU of Northern CA https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/323/214 TOYOSABURO KOREMATSU v. UNITED STATES. https://www.britannica.com/event/Korematsu-v-United-States Korematsu v. United States | Definition, History, & Facts https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/323/214/#tab-opinion-1938225 Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944) https://stopaapihate.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Stop-AAPI-Hate-Year-2-Report.pdf Stopaapihate - Stop-AAPI-Hate-Year-2-Report.pdf --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/chandra-mehl/support

Frank Murphy was a public servant that achieved the highest levels of civilian success in the early 20th century. After serving in World War I, he served as mayor of Detroit, then as the top appointed U.S. official to the Philippines, then as Governor of Michigan, U.S. Attorney General, and ultimately as a Justice on the Supreme Court, appointed by FDR. But it was his securing justice for a black doctor against a KKK mob that made him an icon. In 1925, Ossian Sweet, a black doctor, moved with his family into a traditionally white neighborhood in Detroit. The city did not have Jim Crow but it had the KKK and segregation, particularly in housing. On a daily basis, the Sweet family faced taunts and threats of violence from white mobs that gathered outside. One day in September, the mobs grew violent and threw rocks at the Sweet house, shattering glass windows as the police stood by. Sweet (or one of his companions) shot out from the house and killed a white bystander. He was arrested and tried for murder before an all-white jury. Judge Frank Murphy insisted on a fair trial for the Black defendants. As the trial judge, Murphy told the jury that Sweet had no duty to retreat if his home was threatened, as Americans had a right to live where they wanted. He evoked the house as a castle metaphor. Twice, the jury refused to convict and the charges were eventually dropped. The result was hailed by the NAACP and others as a rare triumph of the legal process for black defendants. When Murphy later ran for mayor of Detroit, he won in black precincts by margins of 30-1. Today's guest, Greg Zipes, is here to share the story of Murphy. He's the author of Justice and Faith: The Frank Murphy Story. Throughout his career, Murphy influenced the country's values in tangible ways, cementing its focus on individual dignity and liberties at times in America's history when it had moved in more authoritarian directions, whether through war-time suspension of rights or Jim Crow-era legislation or the internment of Japanese Americans.Other fascinating parts of his life include his Organization of Mayors, which helped pressure the federal government to provide aid directly to cities and individuals, bypassing the states; how the US did not learn lessons about colonial decoupling from Murphy's role in the Philippines prior to World War II; and Murphy's dissent in the 1944 Supreme Court decision Korematsu vs. US, a decision that debated the legality of Japanese internment camps.

The Supreme Court decisions in the 1857 Dred Scott case and the 1944 Korematsu case are generally considered two of the worst judgments ever handed down by the nation's highest court. One concerned slavery, and the other concerned the internment of Japanese Americans in World War II.

The Supreme Court decisions in the 1857 Dred Scott case and the 1944 Korematsu case are generally considered two of the worst judgments ever handed down by the nation’s highest court. One concerned slavery, and the other concerned the internment of Japanese Americans in World War II.

In this episode, we plunge once again into the murky depths of American jurisprudence to induct Korematsu v. United States into the Supreme Court Hall of Shame. After that, we revisit the trial of Alex Jones (where we previously made a pitstop to discuss his attorney's predilection for obscene hand gestures) to discuss how discovery works in legal proceedings, how the 1st Amendment affects defamation cases, why some people argue (wrongly, we think) that imposing a limit on punitive damages is unconstitutional, and why you should probably say more than “please disregard” if you accidentally send the opposing party's attorney a bunch of files you really shouldn't have.All this, plus the debut of Captain Kangaroo Court, the new segment where we revel in the world of the legally bizarre: first up, what's embarrassing John Bolton today? And why is a former court mediator wearing gloves while sending letters to congressmen?Korematsu v. United States (0:02:26)Heslin v. Jones (0:40:54)Captain Kangaroo Court (1:03:47)

There are certain Supreme Court cases that are infamous, either for their import or their error. Miranda, Roe v. Wade, and Obergefell are just a few. Two of these cases are known simply as Dred Scot and Korematsu. These cases are not only examples of when the courts get things wrong, but of our nature to treat others as less than human.

Attorney Dale Minami is most known for leading the legal team that overturned the conviction of Fred Korematsu. Forty years earlier, Korematsu had defiantly disobyed Executive Order 9066--which unjustly incarcerated over 100,0000 Japanese Americans during World War II--  which led to Korematsu v. United States, widely considered one of the worst and most racist SCOTUS decisions in American history. 

On this episode of Dave Does History*, Bill Mick and Dave talk about the strange case of Fred Korematsu, a man who was arrested, charged and convicted of being in the wrong place because he was of Japanese ancestry. Now… you might think that sounds really… well… stupid. And pretty much everybody around NOW agrees that it was. But at the time, it sort of… made sense? Maybe? At any rate, as the nation goes into convulsions today over the potential reversal of Roe, it's rather amazing to take a look at some of the occasions when the Court reversed itself. More immortally, two of the times it didn't… including the time we sent Fred Korematsu to prison for having Japanese ancestors. *But He Cannot Change It…

My vaunted technology failed me this morning, and the video portion of this was lost to the bit bucket... On Fridays I like to drive Ben to school. It's just an other chance for us to spend some time together and have breakfast as we drive in a less than typical high traffic time. It's also a chance for him to ask me questions that seem... well... typically Ben-esque. "Dad, why isn't the Oklahoma Panhandle a part of Texas?" The answer, of course, is dripping with history, which I love, but Ben said I am "making way to complicated." The thing is that he asks me these questions, and more often than not they start my mind down other avenues of thought. So how did I get from the Oklahoma Panhandle to the overturning of Roe? Well... it's complicated...

Dr. Karen Korematsu, founder of the Fred T. Korematsu Institute, joins Interim Co-Dean Rose Cuison-Villazor to discuss her work advancing education in racial equity, social justice, and human rights, and shares her story as Fred Korematsu's daughter. The Power of Attorney is produced by Rutgers Law School. With two locations minutes from Philadelphia and New York City, Rutgers Law offers the prestige and reputation of a large, nationally known university combined with a personal, small campus experience. Learn more by visiting law.rutgers.edu. Series Producer & Editor: Nate Nakao --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/rutgerslaw/message

In this episode, I interview Sarah January, writer, content creator, author for History Collection, and teacher, about untold stories in history.  Join us as we chat about some of her favorites, James Armistead Lafayette,  Sylvia Mendez, Fred Korematsu, and Dr. Susan La Flesche Picotte.  Never heard these names?  Great!  Sarah will tell you all about them and we'll discuss how to use their stories in your classroom.  Heard of everyone?  Also awesome!  You'll love this episode.Want to get in touch with Sarah?  Visit her on the web, http://www.sarahjanuarywrites.com or follow her on Instagram, @thehistoryhoney.Let's be Friends!Instagram: @teachinghistoryherwayTwitter: http://www.twitter.com/historyherwayOn the Web/Blog: http://www.teachinghistoryherway.com

Chrissie gives you a quick overview of Korematsu v. United States, 1944.Read the essay here: https://historywiththeszilagyis.org/hwts060. See the video here: Find us on Twitter:The Network: @UFPEarth. The Show: @HistorySzilagyi. Chrissie: @TheGoddessLivia. Jason: @JasonDarkElf.Join us in the Federation Council Chambers on Facebook. Send topic suggestions via Twitter or to hwts@ufp.earth. History with the Szilagyis is supported by our patrons: Susan Capuzzi-De ClerckEd ChinevereLaura DullKris HillPlease visit patreon.com/historywiththeszilagyis Notes:US Reports: Korematsu v. United States: https://www.loc.gov/item/usrep323214/ https://korematsuinstitute.org/United Federation of Podcasts is brought to you by our listeners. Special thanks to these patrons on Patreon whose generous contributions help to produce this podcast and the many others on our network! Vera BibleJosh BrewingtonTim CooperChrissie De Clerck-SzilagyiTom ElliotVictor GamboaAlexander GatesPeter Hong.Thad HaitWilliam J. JacksonLori KickingerJim McMahonAnn MarieGreg MolumbyJoe MignoneCasey PettittJustin OserMahendran RadhakrishnanKevin ScharfTom Van ScotterJim StoffelVanessa VaughanDavid Willett You can join this illustrious list by becoming a patron here: https://www.patreon.com/ufpearth

Before the attack on Pearl Harbor, Fred Korematsu led a fairly typical American life. His family went to church every Sunday. They owned a small business. The Korematsu family had always faced some level of racism, but nothing compared to the aftermath of the attack on Pearl Harbor. President Franklin Roosevelt ordered the relocation and incarceration of more than 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry into concentration camps. None of the people who were put in the camps had done anything wrong. There wasn't even evidence that they'd *maybe* done anything wrong. In the face of this racist hysteria, Fred Korematsu stood firm. As a person with Japanese ancestry, he had been ordered to leave his home. But he refused.  Then Brandi tells us another terrifying story about a bathtub. At around 1 a.m. on April 27, 2012, Chad Cutler called 911. He told the dispatcher that he'd just discovered his wife, Lisa, blue and unresponsive in their bathtub. He guessed she'd been in there for a few hours. He claimed he'd fallen asleep after she got in the bathtub earlier that evening. But when paramedics arrived on the scene, they noticed that the bed in the master bedroom was still made. Chad was fully dressed, and eerily calm. And now for a note about our process. For each episode, Kristin reads a bunch of articles, then spits them back out in her very limited vocabulary. Brandi copies and pastes from the best sources on the web. And sometimes Wikipedia. (No shade, Wikipedia. We love you.) We owe a huge debt of gratitude to the real experts who covered these cases. In this episode, Kristin pulled from: “U.S. v Korematsu,” by Douglas O. Linder for FamousTrials.com “Fred Korematsu Fought Against Japanese Internment in the Supreme Court… and Lost,” by Erick Trickey for Smithsonian Magazine “Fred Korematsu,” entry on Wikipedia “Internment of Japanese Americans,” entry on Wikipedia “Fred's Story,” from the Fred T. Korematsu Institute In this episode, Brandi pulled from: “Dead In The Water” episode Accident, Suicide, or Murder “'None Of It Made Any Sense': Illinois Mother's Murder Staged As Bathtub Drowning” by Sharon Lynn Pruitt, Oxygen “Relationships of Cutlers Focus of Trial” by Huey Freeman, Herald and Review “Chad Cutler Trial Focuses on Injuries” by Huey Freeman, Herald and Review “Cutler Jury Begins To Deliberate” by Huey Freeman, Herald and Review “Illinois Man Who Drowned Wife For Insurance Remains Jailed” Insurance News Net “People v. Cutler” casetext.com YOU'RE STILL READING? My, my, my, you skeezy scunch! You must be hungry for more! We'd offer you some sausage brunch, but that gets messy. So how about you head over to our Patreon instead? (patreon.com/lgtcpodcast). At the $5 level, you'll get 25+ full length bonus episodes, plus access to our 90's style chat room!  

Hi listeners, so many people have reached out regarding the Korematsu episode commenting about how much they enjoyed having a co-host on to discuss the episode that we've done it again! Forensic death investigator Joseph Scott Morgan joins Paul to discuss the California trial of Robert Durst.  Durst, a member of one of the richest New York City families was put on trial in California in the summer of 2021 for the murder of his best friend, Susan Berman, which occurred on Christmas Eve, 2000.The trial, however, seemed to be only marginally about Susan Berman, and the prosecution team spent months eliciting testimony regarding the disappearance of Durst's wife, Kathy, back in 1982 and the homicide of Morris Black in 2003.  Durst had already been arrested and put on trial for the murder of Black and was acquitted by a jury back in 2004.This trial had no shortage of odd strategy decisions, dramatic courtroom recreations, and egos.  Listen as Joe and Paul dive into the litigation and bring their unique perspectives.

It's August 31st. This day in 1942, a judge upholds the arrest of a Japanese-American man named Fred Korematsu. Jody, Niki, and Kellie discuss how Korematsu tried to resist the detention of Japanese-Americans in the wake of Pearl Harbor, and the legal battles that broke out after the Roosevelt administration moved hundreds of thousands of people to concentration camps along the west coast. This Day In Esoteric Political History is a proud member of Radiotopia from PRX. Your support helps foster independent, artist-owned podcasts and award-winning stories. If you want to support the show directly, you can do so on our website: ThisDayPod.com Get in touch if you have any ideas for future topics, or just want to say hello. Our website is thisdaypod.com Follow us on social @thisdaypod Our team: Jacob Feldman, Researcher/Producer; Brittani Brown, Producer; Khawla Nakua, Transcripts; music by Teen Daze and Blue Dot Sessions; Julie Shapiro, Executive Producer at Radiotopia

In 1942, approximately 120,000 Japanese immigrants and Japanese Americans were ordered to leave their homes. They were sent to internment camps in desolate regions of the American West. Fred Korematsu refused to comply. This is the story of his appeal to the Supreme Court and what happens when the judicial branch defers to the military.

In light of the recent rise of anti-Asian-American hostility and violence, we interview Dr. Karen Korematsu, daughter of famed civil-rights activist Fred Korematsu, the namesake of the infamous 1944 Supreme Court Case Korematsu v. United States. Mr. Korematsu, a Japanese-American and American citizen, refused to comply with President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s executive order which would have forced his re-location to an American “concentration camp.” In addition, we talk to Korean-born activist Eugene Cho, on his moving experiences as an American immigrant. Plus, live musical performances by Buddy Greene and the Most Outstanding Horeb Mountain Boys. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today's episode is the conclusion of the Fred Korematsu story. After losing his Supreme Court case in 1944, Fred went into a life of obscurity...until a conversation with a young girl in 1967 started Fred back on the journey to right the wrongs bestowed against him, and Japanese American people...and to stop America from making the same mistakes again. Find me at: Website: www.darksidepodcast.co.uk Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/319473136054221 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/suze_darksidepodcast/ Email: info@darksidepodcast.co.uk   Voices: Narrator: SuZe   Sound Effects: Zapsplat.com YouTube Sound Effects Music & Sounds: Possession by Purple Planet – All music used under an Attribution License - http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ All media outtakes have been sourced via open media and are readily available via an internet search.   Sources: President Gerald Ford rescinded a Democrat Outrage Against Japanese-Americans - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJyr-lkayTM FRED KOREMATSU: A CIVIL RIGHTS HERO - https://www.niot.org/niot-video/fred-korematsu-civil-rights-hero Supreme Court Landmark Case [Korematsu v. United States] - https://www.stitcher.com/show/cspan-landmarkcases/episode/supreme-court-landmark-case-korematsu-v-united-states-42674029 Civil Wrongs & Rights: The Fred Korematsu Story - https://vimeo.com/118490262 A Man of Quiet Bravery - https://vimeo.com/140002761 Donald Trump seen calling for Muslim registry in new video despite denials - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-muslim-registry-video-president-islam-policies-immigration-a7424511.html President Reagan's at the Japanese-American Internment Compensation Bill signing on August 10, 1988 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcaQRhcBXKY Barack Obama tells Muslim Americans the US is ‘one big family' - https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2015/jun/23/obama-iftar-dinner-ramadan-one-big-family-video Donald Trump seen calling for Muslim registry in new video despite denials - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-muslim-registry-video-president-islam-policies-immigration-a7424511.html Donald Trump surrogate cites America's Japanese internment camps as 'precedent' for Muslim registry- https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-surrogate-muslim-registry-japanese-internment-camps-precedent-a7422171.html Exclusive: Donald Trump Says He Might Have Supported Japanese Internment - https://time.com/4140050/donald-trump-muslims-japanese-internment/ Student shoots video of WTC on 9/11 A former NYU student - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qiVBOqNiOs Remembering Civil Liberties Hero Fred Korematsu - https://www.aclu.org/blog/remembering-civil-liberties-hero-fred-korematsu Guantánamo Bay: 14 years of injustice - https://www.amnesty.org.uk/guantanamo-bay-human-rights US tortured detainees' after 9/11 attack - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FZC3yQMhPI Rasul v. Bush - https://ccrjustice.org/home/what-we-do/our-cases/rasul-v-bush Essay: Remember Endo? - https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/214393479.pdf A plea to cast aside Korematsu - https://www.scotusblog.com/2014/01/a-plea-to-cast-aside-korematsu/ Obama Administration Refuses Opportunity to Repudiate Japanese Internment Ruling - https://reason.com/2014/04/01/obama-administration-refuses-opportunity/ The American National Anthem — US Army Chorus - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gv8mIF7l-A Trump adviser Stephen Miller says the president's power 'will not be questioned' - https://www.washingtonpost.com/videonational/trump-adviser-stephen-miller-says-the-presidents-power-will-not-be-questioned/2017/02/13/0f772184-f14f-11e6-9fb1-2d8f3fc9c0ed_video.html SCOTUS Conservatives Repudiate Yet Echo Korematsu On Muslim Ban - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_K_n3EVoamA A licence to discriminate: Trump's Muslim & refugee ban - https://www.amnesty.org.uk/licence-discriminate-trumps-muslim-refugee-ban Supreme Court finally rejects infamous Korematsu decision on Japanese-American internment - https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/26/politics/korematsu-supreme-court-travel-ban-roberts-sotomayor/index.html Supreme Court upholds Trump travel ban, president claims vindication from 'hysterical' critics - https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-upholds-trump-travel-ban-n873441

The incarceration of tens of thousands of Japanese Americans in the 1940s is one of the most shameful acts in American history. Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Judge Edward M Chen and Don Tamaki, members of the legal team that worked to clear Fred Korematsu’s name almost 40 years after his conviction, to discuss the overlooked context, corruption, and cover-up that enabled the policy, and to examine how the Supreme Court has yet to fully contend with the legacy of Korematsu v United States. They also unpack the lessons the case offers for the present moment. The documentary discussed is Alternative Facts: The Lies of Executive Order 9066. Podcast production by Sara Burningham. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The incarceration of tens of thousands of Japanese Americans in the 1940s is one of the most shameful acts in American history. Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Judge Edward M Chen and Don Tamaki, members of the legal team that worked to clear Fred Korematsu’s name almost 40 years after his conviction, to discuss the overlooked context, corruption, and cover-up that enabled the policy, and to examine how the Supreme Court has yet to fully contend with the legacy of Korematsu v United States. They also unpack the lessons the case offers for the present moment. The documentary discussed is Alternative Facts: The Lies of Executive Order 9066. Podcast production by Sara Burningham. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On today’s holiday mailbag edition of the podcast, David and Sarah answer a series of listener questions ranging from legal history to college football. Do you have to admit guilt to accept a pardon? Are there any wrongfully decided Supreme Court cases that are still on the books? Is there a secular argument for prohibiting abortion or does restricting the practice entirely depend on adopting religious doctrine in the public square? Are tier 2 or tier 3 law schools worth attending? What are the best books of the year? What is the constitutionality of factoring race into vaccine distribution? And MORE! Tune in to hear the breakdown.   Show Notes: -A brief history of pardons from Smithsonian magazine. -Korematsu v. United States, Buck v. Bell, Roe v. Wade, Kelo v. City of New London, Schenck v. United States, Employment Division v. Smith, Monell v. Department of Social Services, Brandenburg v. Ohio, Skinner v. Oklahoma, Trump v. Hawaii. -38 states with fetal homicide laws. -Qualified immunity doctrine. -“Books to Read If You’re Tired of Hearing About Impeachment” by Sarah Isgur in The Dispatch. -Sarah’s book recommendations: The Witches: Salem, 1692 by Stacy Schiff, She Has Her Mother's Laugh: The Powers, Perversions, and Potential of Heredity by Carl Zimmer, How Innovation Works: And Why It Flourishes in Freedom by Matt Ridley, Hero of the Empire: The Boer War, a Daring Escape, and the Making of Winston Churchill by Candice Millard. -David’s book recommendations: Divided We Fall: America's Secession Threat and How to Restore Our Nation by David French, Rhythm of War: The Stormlight Archive, Book 4 by Brandon Sanderson, The Democratization of American Christianity by Nathan Hatch. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Using two cases from Franklin Roosevelt's administration - United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936) and Korematsu v. United States (1944) - this episode explores a fundamental constitutional question: what is executive power? Justice Sutherland's opinion in Curtiss-Wright offers a high-level civics lesson on the constitutional difference between the enumerated powers of the government in domestic affairs and the largely unenumerated powers of the president in foreign affairs. The case of Korematsu, about the detainment of 120,000 Japanese-Americans during World War II, however, blurs the line between domestic affairs, on the one hand, and foreign affairs, on the other, and challenges us to think about the constitutional limits of executive power.

On September 19, 2020, Judge Laurel Beeler in San Francisco granted a preliminary injunction to stop the Trump Administration's executive order that would remove WeChat and its software support from U.S. app stores, effectively banning the Chinese "superapp." ****** In this special unlocked bonus, Jess, Diana, Chris, and Teen dive into the details of the executive orders against WeChat and TikTok, and contextualize the upcoming trial to keep WeChat in American cyberspace. Like US vs Wong Kim Ark and Yick Wo vs Hopkins, US WeChat Users Alliance vs Donald Trump recalls the underreported and under-appreciated heritage of Chinese American legal battles that defined American concepts of citizenship and civil rights. It will potentially be a Supreme Court case that will define the civil liberties of all Americans in the digital age. Please consider donating at: https://uswua.org/donations TWITTER: Teen (@mont_jiang) Chris (@JesuInToast) Diana (@discoveryduck) Jess (@cogitatotomato) REFERENCED RESOURCES: -NYTimes: "WeChat Ban Makes U.S.-China Standoff Personal" https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/18/technology/wechat-ban-united-states-china.html -US WeChat Users Alliance Vs Donald Trump: https://chinaipr2.files.wordpress.com/2020/08/dkt.-01-complaint-for-declaratory-and-injunctive-relief-08-21-2020.pdf -US WeChat Users Alliance Order on Motion for Preliminary Injunction: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17470217/59/us-wechat-users-alliance/ -US vs Korematsu: https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-supreme-courts-worst-decision-lives-on-in-2016-campaign -US vs Wong Kim Ark: https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2018/10/30/birthright-citizenship-trump-inspired-history-lesson-th-amendment/ -Yick Wo vs Hopkins: https://repository.law.umich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1023&context=mjrl SUBMISSIONS & COMMENTS: editor.planamag@gmail.com EFPA Opening Theme: "Fuck Out My Face" by Ayekay (open.spotify.com/artist/16zQKaDN5XgHAhfOJHTigJ)

A look at what Korematsu v US led to, and how Trump v. Hawaii (2018) shows how little has changed where race and racism cases in the U.S. Supreme Court (Brown v. Bd Of Ed, 1954) not withstanding, are concerned. Omar Moore travels through periods of American history via the U.S. Supreme Court. June 21, 2020. Omar's film review of “Da 5 Bloods” (bit.ly/37nliju) Check your voter registration and register to vote at iwillvote.com, rockthevote.org, whenweallvote.org. MOORE THOUGHTS: moore.substack.com. Moore On Medium: medium.com/@omooresf The Politicrat YouTube page: bit.ly/3bfWk6V The Politicrat Facebook page: bit.ly/3bU1O7c The Politicrat blog: politicrat.politics.blog SUBSCRIBE to this podcast! Follow/tweet Omar at: http://twitter.com/thepopcornreel Follow/tweet The Politicrat at: twitter.com/the_politicrat

As the current Coronavirus situation has continued, we are now faced with growing questions about our civil liberties. We are thinking again about the actions the government can legitimately take in restricting the freedom of American citizens in a time of crisis. For example, when and how much can the government restrict your freedom of movement, speech, religion, or carrying on a business? Can the government even force you to be vaccinated? To gain some historical insight on these and many other questions, join Dr. Jeff Sikkenga, Professor of Political Science at Ashland University and Executive Director of the Ashbrook Center, and Dr. Joseph Fornieri, a professor in Ashbrook's Master of Arts in American History and Government and a professor of political science at Rochester Institute of Technology in New York for this special webinar. Joe is an expert on civil liberties and the Constitution, and the editor of Ashbrook's First Amendment volume in our Core Documents Collection. This program aired live on 15 April 2020 at 1pm ET. All attendees of the live program will receive a PDF certificate of participation for continuing education hours, and the program will be recorded and made available in our YouTube and podcast archives. Suggested Readings (all excerpted): Ex Parte Milligan, 1866 Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 1905 Shenck v. United States, 1919 Korematsu v. United States, 1944 Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 1952 The post Insights from History: Fire in a Crowded Theater – Civil Liberties in Times of Emergency appeared first on Teaching American History.

As the current Coronavirus situation has continued, we are now faced with growing questions about our civil liberties. We are thinking again about the actions the government can legitimately take in restricting the freedom of American citizens in a time of crisis. For example, when and how much can the government restrict your freedom of movement, speech, religion, or carrying on a business? Can the government even force you to be vaccinated? To gain some historical insight on these and many other questions, join Dr. Jeff Sikkenga, Professor of Political Science at Ashland University and Executive Director of the Ashbrook Center, and Dr. Joseph Fornieri, a professor in Ashbrook’s Master of Arts in American History and Government and a professor of political science at Rochester Institute of Technology in New York for this special webinar. Joe is an expert on civil liberties and the Constitution, and the editor of Ashbrook’s First Amendment volume in our Core Documents Collection. This program aired live on 15 April 2020 at 1pm ET. All attendees of the live program will receive a PDF certificate of participation for continuing education hours, and the program will be recorded and made available in our YouTube and podcast archives. Suggested Readings (all excerpted): Ex Parte Milligan, 1866 Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 1905 Shenck v. United States, 1919 Korematsu v. United States, 1944 Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 1952 The post Insights from History: Fire in a Crowded Theater – Civil Liberties in Times of Emergency appeared first on Teaching American History.

Episode Notes Once again Mrs. V brings us a story from World War 2 of Historical Context that covers the US Homefront in Korematsu v the United States and carries all the way to 2018! Mr. D tries to stump Mrs. V in a WW2 edition of History Crush and Finally we bring you the extra you wanted...Military bases and their effect on Florida during WW@ in the Fru Fru Segment.

Americans sometimes find themselves at the center of some of the biggest moments in constitutional history. John Tinker, one of the students who brought the lawsuit in the landmark student speech case Tinker v. Des Moines; Karen Korematsu, daughter of Fred Korematsu, petitioner in the Japanese internment case Korematsu v. United States; and Cheryl Brown Henderson, daughter of Reverend Oliver Brown, the petitioner in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, share what that’s like. They describe their families’ experiences bringing these landmark cases, how the outcome affected their lives, and how those cases shaped the Constitution and the country. February 24 was the anniversary of the Supreme Court’s 1969 decision in Tinker v. Des Moines. This program was recorded here at the National Constitution Center on Constitution Day 2017. We were lucky to have lots of students here at the Center and in the audience that day, so you’ll hear their questions for our panelists! Questions or comments about the podcast? Email us at podcast@constitutioncenter.org.

In this episode, two of our eboard members discuss the Korematsu v. United States case and it's effect on today's politics, including the Muslim Ban.

This week at In The Past Lane, the American History podcast, we learn about Fred Korematsu, the courageous young man who in 1942 stood up the US government to oppose Japanese Internment during World War II. He ultimately lost his case, which went all the way to the US Supreme Court. But over time, as the nation eventually confronted the terrible harm done by Japanese Internment, Fred Korematsu was vindicated. He dedicated the rest of his life to fighting for civil rights. And we also take a look at some key events that occurred this week in US history, like the 1960 civil rights sit-ins in Greensboro, NC and the 1990 opening of the first McDonald’s fast food restaurant in the Soviet Union. And birthdays, including -   Jan 30, 1882: Franklin D. Roosevelt Jan 30, 1909: Saul Alinsky Jan 31, 1919: Jackie Robinson Feb 1, 1902: Langston Hughes Main Story: Fred Korematsu and the Fight Against Internment  On May 30, 1942, 23-year old Fred Korematsu was walking with his girlfriend on a street in San Leandro California. A police officer approached, asked to see his papers, and then announced he had to come with him to the police station for questioning. Hours later Korematsu was arrested for violating a federal law that mandated that all persons of Japanese ancestry voluntarily surrender to the government to be sent to internment camps. Just six months earlier, the United States Naval base at Pearl Harbor Hawaii had been attacked by Japanese forces, plunging the US into World War II. It also plunged it into a fit of racist fear and paranoia about Japanese Americans. Baseless rumors, many of them put forth by government officials and spread by the media, suggested that Japanese Americans could not be trusted – that they were likely loyal to the enemy Japanese government and therefore posed a security threat. And so on February 19, 1942, just 10 weeks after Pearl Harbor, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 that called for all persons of Japanese ancestry to be sent to so-called Relocation Centers for the duration of the war. Significantly, even though the US was also at war with Germany and Italy, no such relocation order was applied to Americans of German or Italian ancestry. Leaders in the Japanese American community urged cooperation. They argued that resistance to internment would only validate claims by white Americans that they were disloyal. And so in the coming months, more than 110,000 people – a majority of them American citizens - were sent to one of 10 internment camps, each surrounded by barbed wire and patrolled by armed guards. Many Japanese Americans lost everything – their homes, businesses, and farms. – and never recovered from it. They also experienced humiliation and a sense of rejection by their country. As Korematsu put it, “I lost everything when they put us in prison. I was an enemy alien, a man without a country.” It was one of the greatest violations of civil liberties in American history. And that’s the way an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union saw it at the time. Ernest Besig read about Fred Korematsu’s case and went to visit him in jail. He asked him: Would you be willing to fight your conviction? Even all the way to the supreme court if necessary? Yes, said Fred Korematsu. As he later recalled thinking, “I was an American citizen, and I had as many rights as anyone else.” Besig filed a case on June 12, 1942, arguing that executive order 9066 violated the constitutional rights of Japanese Americans because it was based on racism. The state court summarily rejected their effort to overturn Korematsu’s earlier guilty verdict. So they appealed in federal court and lost again. The last stop was the US Supreme Court. The High Court heard the case in October, and issued their ruling on December 18, 1944. By a margin of 6-3, the majority rejected Fred Korematsu’s appeal and upheld the constitutionality of internment, saying it wasn’t motivated by racism, but rather “military necessity.” While the decision was disappointing, the three dissenting justices – doubtless recognizing that this case, Korematsu versus US, would one day be ranked with other ignominious Supreme Court decisions like Dred Scott and Plessy vs. Ferguson, issued a blistering dissent. Justice Frank Murphy wrote: "I dissent, therefore, from this legalization of racism. Racial discrimination in any form and in any degree has no justifiable part whatever in our democratic way of life.” And Justice Robert H. Jackson concurred: “The Court for all time has validated the principle of racial discrimination in criminal procedure and of transplanting American citizens. The principle then lies about like a loaded weapon, ready for the hand of any authority that can bring forward a plausible claim of an urgent need.” World War II came to an end the following year, and eventually Japanese Americans were released to begin the process of rebuilding the shattered lives. Fred Korematsu get married, found work as a draftsman, and fell out of public consciousness - a forgotten civil rights hero. In fact, Korematsu told no one about his experience, including his children. They learned about his fight against Internment and his US Supreme Court case when one of them read about it in a US history textbook in school in the 1960s.  But in the 1970s, as a new generation of Japanese Americans begin to break the silence over their mistreatment at the hands of the US government - and eventually seek reparations - Fred Korematsu was rediscovered. In 1983, with the help of a legal scholar who had unearthed a mountain of evidence about the racist motives behind internment - evidence the US government had suppressed during the trials - Fred Korematsu had his conviction overturned in federal court. He was vindicated. Empowered by this turn of events, Fred Korematsu became a vocal civil rights activist for the rest of his life. In 1998, President Bill Clinton awarded him the presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor. Fred Koremastu died in 2004. Seven years later in 2011, the state of California named January 30 – Fred Korematsu’s birthday – as Fred Korematsu Day. It was the first instance in US history that a day had been named in honor of an Asian American. Since then, five more states have recognized named January 30 as Fred Korematsu Day. Fred Korematsu once said, “It may take time to prove you're right, but you have to stick to it.” Further Reading: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/fred-korematsu-fought-against-japanese-internment-supreme-court-and-lost-180961967/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Korematsu https://www.zinnedproject.org/news/tdih/fred-korematsu-arrested/   For more information about the In The Past Lane podcast, head to our website, www.InThePastLane.com  Music for This Episode Jay Graham, ITPL Intro (JayGMusic.com) The Joy Drops, “Track 23,” Not Drunk (Free Music Archive) Borrtex, “Perception” (Free Music Archive) Blue Dot Sessions, "Pat Dog" (Free Music Archive) Jon Luc Hefferman, “Winter Trek” (Free Music Archive) The Bell, “I Am History” (Free Music Archive) Production Credits Executive Producer: Lulu Spencer Graphic Designer: Maggie Cellucci Website by: ERI Design Legal services: Tippecanoe and Tyler Too Social Media management: The Pony Express Risk Assessment: Little Big Horn Associates Growth strategies: 54 40 or Fight © In The Past Lane, 2020

Robert Foss is the Director of Immigration Legal Services Division at the International Institute of Los Angeles.   ---> Subscribe for new podcast episode Email Notifications HERE "Well I think in general, it's interesting to parse the word ecstasis, ecstacy. And ecstasis to stand outside oneself. So it's a kind of, it's an altered state of consciousness, it's a kind of transcendence...but it's also a connection, some sort of realization that on some deep level, one is not alone." /11:37 Supreme Court Cases Referenced The Cherokee Cases were a trio of cases before the Marshall Court:  Tassels' Case: a December 1830 writ of error in the criminal case of George Tassels, mooted by Tassels' execution before the Court could hear the case Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 Pet.) 1 (1831) Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515 (1832)   United States v. Schooner Amistad, 40 U.S. (15 Pet.) 518 (1841). Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857) In re Ah Fong, 1 F. Cas. 213, 216 (1874) ("we cannot shut our eyes to the fact that much of what was formerly said upon the power of the state in this respect, grew out of the necessity which the southern states, in which the institution of slavery existed, felt of excluding free negroes from their limits."). Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U.S. 698 (1893) Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944) _________ Genuinely Useful podcast is sponsored by Magical Egypt (go to to this podcast’s Episode 13 with Chance Gardner, released Nov 8, 2018) You can Save 15% on Magical Egypt with Coupon Code "genuse" Own Both Magical Egypt Series 1 and 2 ___________ You can listen and/or buy the podcast’s music and support the show by visiting Bandcamp. Bandcamp -> https://abeslogic.bandcamp.com/track/what-we-crave This episode’s featured original song - “What We Crave” ---> Hear All of the Podcast's Featured Music HERE See Episode Webpage  https://genuinelyuseful.com/podcast-ep23-robert-foss ========+++======== HELP SPREAD THE WORD! I’d love it if you could please share Genuinely Useful podcast on twitter and facebook:   https://twitter.com/genuinelyuseful   https://www.facebook.com/genuinelyuseful   If you enjoy this podcast, tap on over to Apple Podcasts and kindly leave me a rating, write a review, and subscribe! Thank you so much! Links to Share Genuinely Useful podcast:   Click here to share on Apple Podcasts [iOS]   Click here to share on Overcast [iOS]   Click here to share on Spotify   Click here to share on Google Podcasts [Android   Click here to share on Stitcher [iOS and Android]   Genuinely Useful Podcast Home Page https://genuinelyuseful.com/podcast   Contact: genuinelyuseful@gmail.com   Thanks for being here -Abe

In a dark stain on the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence, a 6-3 majority held that the fear of potential “espionage and sabotage” from American Citizens of Japanese heritage, during World War II, was enough to justify interning (a euphemism for “jailing”) Americans of Japanese descent. The post The Law episode 51: Korematsu v. United States appeared first on Speakeasy Ideas.

At the 2019 ABA Annual Meeting, host Michele Wong Krause welcomes ABA Medal winner Dale Minami to discuss his legal career and passion for using the law to empower the Asian Pacific American community. They talk about Dale’s most exceptional professional accomplishments, including his work to overturn the conviction in a 1942 case, Korematsu v. United States. They also discuss current issues of immigration, racism, and inequality, and Dale cautions lawmakers against repeating egregious mistakes of the past. Dale Minami is senior counsel with the law firm Minami Tamaki LLP in San Francisco, CA.

This week, we're talking about Fred Korematsu, whose great crime was being in the place where he was born.  How did America get to the point of incarcerating its own citizens in the 1940s? And what does that story have to tell us about today? 

An evening to celebrate community and advocacy for immigrant rights. Karen Korematsu of the Fred T. Korematsu institute is the keynote speaker.

This is the only episode of the Hijabi Diaries that doesn't involve a profile on a Muslim woman. During this episode, we take a break from our regular programming to speak with a former Supreme Court clerk, now a Law Professor at the IU Maurer School of Law, Ian Samuel. Samuel talks to us about the recent upholding of the Trump Administration's travel ban by the 2018 US Supreme Court, with a particular focus on its predicted impact on Muslim Americans. This travel ban will limit travel and immigration from 7 Muslim-majority nations in the Middle East. Samuel discusses the parallels that can be drawn between the case of Trump v. Hawaii (the case associated with the Travel Ban), and one of the most infamous Supreme Court cases of all time, Korematsu. The Hijabi Diaries is produced in partnership with the Openhearted Campaign to End Islamophobia. Aubrey Seader is our executive producer, with help from WFHB News Director Wes Martin and co-producer Anna Maidi. Music heard on the podcast includes Baraka Blue's "Love and Light." Subscribe, rate, and review on iTunes. Learn more the Hijabi Diaries at www.hijabidiaries.com.

On March 15-16, 2019, the Federalist Society's student chapter at the ASU Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law hosted the 2019 National Student Symposium. The symposium opened with a keynote lecture by Prof. Richard Epstein on "Is Lochner v. New York Constitutionally Indefensible?"KEYNOTE TOPIC: Is Lochner v. New York Constitutionally Indefensible?Is Lochner v New York constitutionally indefensible? It is commonly asserted that there are only four cases in American constitutional history that are beyond the pale: Dred Scott v. Sanford, Plessy v. Ferguson, Korematsu v United States, and Lochner v. New York. The stark contrast between decisions that have thwarted economic and social liberties and the one case that defends it, should itself be sufficient to explain why economic liberties today deserve increased constitutional protection. In this lecture, Professor Epstein will examine the yawning gulf between Lochner and these three other decisions.Featuring:Grant Frazier, ASU Sandra Day O'Connor College of LawDean Douglas Sylvester, ASU Sandra Day O'Connor College of LawProf. Richard Epstein, New York University School of LawAs always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

On March 15-16, 2019, the Federalist Society's student chapter at the ASU Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law hosted the 2019 National Student Symposium. The symposium opened with a keynote lecture by Prof. Richard Epstein on "Is Lochner v. New York Constitutionally Indefensible?"KEYNOTE TOPIC: Is Lochner v. New York Constitutionally Indefensible?Is Lochner v New York constitutionally indefensible? It is commonly asserted that there are only four cases in American constitutional history that are beyond the pale: Dred Scott v. Sanford, Plessy v. Ferguson, Korematsu v United States, and Lochner v. New York. The stark contrast between decisions that have thwarted economic and social liberties and the one case that defends it, should itself be sufficient to explain why economic liberties today deserve increased constitutional protection. In this lecture, Professor Epstein will examine the yawning gulf between Lochner and these three other decisions.Featuring:Grant Frazier, ASU Sandra Day O'Connor College of LawDean Douglas Sylvester, ASU Sandra Day O'Connor College of LawProf. Richard Epstein, New York University School of LawAs always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.

The concept of equality has been with us since the founding of the United States, and it's been revised and fought over and debated for about as long, from the Civil War and the Fourteenth Amendment to the culture wars and the legalization of same-sex marriage. But not every argument for equality that is brought up in a court of law goes well. In fact, equality arguments often backfire, ending up affirming inequality: Dred Scott v. Sandford, Plessy v. Ferguson, Korematsu v. United States … or just last year, Trump v. Hawaii. Losing the battle in court for an abstract concept like equality has tangible consequences for people on the ground, from trans soldiers to Iranian kids seeking lifesaving medical treatment. But what if there’s a way to fight for equal treatment without sending current laws backsliding? American University law professor Robert Tsai joins us on the podcast to argue for what he calls “practical equality.”Go beyond the episode:Robert L. Tsai’s Practical Equality: Forging Justice in a Divided NationRead his essay on how another approach would be not only to broaden the variety of arguments, but also to expand the venues for those arguments.For a steamier episode on the law, check out our interview with Geoffrey R. Stone in the episode “Out of the Closet and Into the Courts”Listen to the More Perfect episode “The Imperfect Plaintiffs” about how certain cases—like Plessy v. Ferguson—were manufactured by individuals to challenge existing lawFor another spin on how public action influences the courts, check out this interview with lawyer Darryl Li about the mass protests of the Muslim travel ban, as well as Barry Friedman’s The Will of the PeopleTune in every week to catch interviews with the liveliest voices from literature, the arts, sciences, history, and public affairs; reports on cutting-edge works in progress; long-form narratives; and compelling excerpts from new books. Hosted by Stephanie Bastek. Follow us on Twitter @TheAmScho or on Facebook.Subscribe: iTunes • Feedburner • Stitcher • Google Play • AcastHave suggestions for projects you’d like us to catch up on, or writers you want to hear from? Send us a note: podcast [at] theamericanscholar [dot] org. And rate us on iTunes! Our theme music was composed by Nathan Prillaman. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The concept of equality has been with us since the founding of the United States, and it's been revised and fought over and debated for about as long, from the Civil War and the Fourteenth Amendment to the culture wars and the legalization of same-sex marriage. But not every argument for equality that is brought up in a court of law goes well. In fact, equality arguments often backfire, ending up affirming inequality: Dred Scott v. Sandford, Plessy v. Ferguson, Korematsu v. United States … or just last year, Trump v. Hawaii. Losing the battle in court for an abstract concept like equality has tangible consequences for people on the ground, from trans soldiers to Iranian kids seeking lifesaving medical treatment. But what if there’s a way to fight for equal treatment without sending current laws backsliding? American University law professor Robert Tsai joins us on the podcast to argue for what he calls “practical equality.”Go beyond the episode:Robert L. Tsai’s Practical Equality: Forging Justice in a Divided NationRead his essay on how another approach would be not only to broaden the variety of arguments, but also to expand the venues for those arguments.For a steamier episode on the law, check out our interview with Geoffrey R. Stone in the episode “Out of the Closet and Into the Courts”Listen to the More Perfect episode “The Imperfect Plaintiffs” about how certain cases—like Plessy v. Ferguson—were manufactured by individuals to challenge existing lawFor another spin on how public action influences the courts, check out this interview with lawyer Darryl Li about the mass protests of the Muslim travel ban, as well as Barry Friedman’s The Will of the PeopleTune in every week to catch interviews with the liveliest voices from literature, the arts, sciences, history, and public affairs; reports on cutting-edge works in progress; long-form narratives; and compelling excerpts from new books. Hosted by Stephanie Bastek. Follow us on Twitter @TheAmScho or on Facebook.Subscribe: iTunes • Feedburner • Stitcher • Google Play • AcastHave suggestions for projects you’d like us to catch up on, or writers you want to hear from? Send us a note: podcast [at] theamericanscholar [dot] org. And rate us on iTunes! Our theme music was composed by Nathan Prillaman.  See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Bryan Stevenson is a a civil rights attorney who represents prisoners on death row. Described as “America’s Nelson Mandela,” his Equal Justice Initiative, a non-profit law firm based in Alabama, is dedicated to challenging racial injustice and ending mass incarceration. Stevenson is also the author of the New York Times best-selling memoir Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption.  REFERENCES AND SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL Q&A Michael Cohen’s prepared opening statement before the House Oversight Committee Michael Cohen’s testimony before the House Oversight Committee An article from the Washington Post about Representative Matt Gaetz’s tweet and the Florida Bar’s investigation  Rule 35 - Correcting or reducing a sentence Stevenson & EJI Stevenson’s book, Just Mercy The movie adaptation of Just Mercy(2020) The Equal Justice Initiative EJI’s The Legacy Museum: From Enslavement to Mass Incarceration EJI’s The National Memorial for Peace and Justice (and efforts to create memorials in Berlin and South Africa) Supreme Court Brown v. Board of Education, 1954 SCOTUS decisions concerning the death penalty: Furman v. Georgia (1972), Gregg v. Georgia(1976), McCleskey v. Kemp(1987) An article in the Washington Post on the McCleskey opinion and dissent (“fear of too much justice”) A 1994 paper by David Baldus and co. addressing to the “inevitability doctrine” SCOTUS decisions concerning life sentences without parole for juveniles: Graham v. Florida(2010), Miller v. Alabama (2010), Sullivan v. Florida(2010), Jackson v. Hobbes(2012) The SCOTUS decision that struck down the death penalty for juveniles: Roper v. Simmons, 2005 (and an article from the NYT analyzing the court opinion) The SCOTUS decision that struck down the death penalty for mentally ill folks: Atkins v. Virginia, 2002 The SCOTUS decision that justified Japanese internment: Korematsu v. United States ,1944 An article in the Washington Post on court nominees refusing to answer questions about Brown v. Board of Education The Scottsboro Boys case and the ultimate pardon of the wrongfully accused Congress An article from the Asia Society on the history of Asian exclusion acts History of The Klu Klux Klan Act Constitutional Amendments Eighth Amendment Thirteenth Amendment Alabama An article in the New Yorker about Alabama judges’ power to “override” jury rulings and impose the death penalty Articles in Slate about Alabama’s Confederate Memorial Day and Robert E. Lee Day Articles in the Washington Post about Goodloe Sutton’s editorial calling for the return of the KKK and his subsequent resignation and replacement. Plus, Senator Jones and Representative Sewell’s reactions to Sutton Judicial elections An article by Adam Liptak in the NYT on judicial elections, and analysis from The Brennan Center on how judicial elections impact sentencing A 2012 article from the Yale Law Journal, “The Origins of the Elected Prosecutor” Recently elected District Attorneys in Philadelphia, Chicago, Brooklyn, Baltimore Relevant news An article from the NYT about Virginia officials wearing blackface in the past A timeline from the NYT on Jussie Smollett, plus an update on his role on the TV series, “Empire.”  Do you have a question for Preet? Tweet it to @PreetBharara with the hashtag #askpreet, email staytuned@cafe.com, or call 669-247-7338 and leave a voicemail. 

This week we discuss the Super Bowl, VA’s Abortion Bill, and the 75th Anniversary of Korematsu v. U.S.

This season, More Perfect is taking its camera lens off the Supreme Court and zooming in on the words of the people: the 27 amendments that We The People have made to our Constitution. We're taking on these 27 amendments both in song and in story. This episode is best listened to alongside 27: The Most Perfect Album, an entire album (an ALBUM!) and digital experience of original music and art inspired by the 27 Amendments. Think of these episodes as the audio liner notes. Amendments 13, 14, and 15 are collectively known as the Reconstruction Amendments: they were passed as instructions to rebuild the country after Civil War. They addressed slavery, citizenship, equality and voting rights for black people. This week, the More Perfect team explores the legacy of the amendments beyond the Civil War — the ways the promises of these amendments changed the country and the ways they've fallen short. First, More Perfect Executive Producer Suzie Lechtenberg and Legal Editor Elie Mystal explore the loophole in the 13th Amendment's slavery ban that's being used in a strange context: college football. We share songs about the 13th Amendment from Kash Doll and Bette Smith. Then, producer Julia Longoria shares a conversation with her roommate Alia Almeida exploring their relationship to the amendments. Inspired by the 14th's Amendment's grant of equal protection and citizenship rights, Sarah Kay's poem tells the story of her grandmother, a U.S. citizen who was interned during World War II in a Japanese American Internment camp. Despite the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause, the Supreme Court upheld the internment of U.S. citizens based solely on their Japanese heritage in a case called Korematsu v. United States. In 2018, the Supreme Court said Korematsu was "wrong the day it was decided." The Court went on to uphold President Trump's controversial travel ban in Trump v. Hawaii. "Korematsu has nothing to do with this case," wrote the majority. In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sotomayor accused the majority of "redeploying the same dangerous logic underlying Korematsu" when they upheld the ban. Finally, hear songs inspired by the 15th Amendment by Aisha Burns and Nnamidi Ogbonnaya.

Join Adam Kinkade in Boston, Massachusetts as Perpetual Coffee continues traveling the East Coast. Today, Adam talks to Dominic Silvestri, Tina Silvestry and Samantha Kersch as the discuss Immigration, an echo of Korematsu and Harvard University’s feud with the Trump Administration.

The Supreme Court is looking at a case that relates to Korematsu v. United States, while the White House starts to make their moves towards appointing a new justice. But ai yai yai, we aren’t talking about last month’s headlines—we’re talking about “Separation of Powers,” from November 2003. And this week, we’re joined by special guest Michael Hyatt who plays Angela Blake. She gave us a wonderfully candid interview about how she got the role—and why Angela didn’t stick around for longer. For more, visit thewestwingweekly.com/507

Devon and Varsha discuss the bullshit coming out of SCOTUS recently and the potential ramifications of Kennedy's retirement announcement. Devon sits down with ThinkProgress justice editor for the second week in a row to go in depth into the SCOTUS decisions and the grim picture that we are facing.

NEW This Week on FNR   Trump’s trade war heats up causing Harley Davidson and other companies to move production overseas   A week of controversial Supreme Court decisions: Muslim ban, Korematsu, Janus, anti-abortion health clinics   Why the retirement of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy is a really big deal   Citizens publically push back against members of Trump’s administration: Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Kirstjen Nielsen, and Stephen Miller   Insensitivity and lack of empathy on full display with Corey Lewandowski’s “Womp Womp” comment and Melania’s “I Really Don’t Care Do U?” jacket   …and more     *FORWARD NATION RADIO featuring David Leventhal  RAW   l   INFORMATIVE   l   ACCURATE Also available on our YouTube channel -Please SUBSCRIBE Visit forwardnationradio.com for the videocast, all shows, fun toons, stats, and more. If you love what you heard, Like Us and share on Facebook - Instagram - Twitter

What happens when the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, seems to get it wrong? Korematsu v. United States upheld President Franklin Roosevelt’s internment of American citizens during World War II based solely on their Japanese heritage, for the sake of national security. In this episode, we follow Fred Korematsu’s path to the Supreme Court, and we ask the question: if you can’t get justice in the Supreme Court, can you find it someplace else?

We call this episode, “What’s Cake Got To Do With It?”. This is because we will discuss the recent Supreme Court ruling upholding Trump’s travel ban and its relation to Masterpiece Cake Shop, Arlene’s Flowers, and the restaurant, Red Hen’s refusal to serve White House Press Secretary, Sarah Sanders. For many of us, the travel ban decision left us feeling heartbroken and helpless. The decision reminds us of Korematsu, the SCOTUS decision upholding Japanese-American imprisonment. It does not uphold this country’s most basic principles of freedom and equality.  In a powerful dissent, Justice Sotomayor points out the disconnect between the majority’s ruling in this Hawaii v Trump, “where the majority completely sets aside the President’s charged state­ments about Muslims as irrelevant,” and the holding in Masterpiece Cakeshop, “where the majority consid­ered the state commissioners’ statements about religion to be persuasive evidence of unconstitutional government action.”  Today, LeGaL was joined on our LGBT Podcast by Lambda Legal’s Omar Gonzalez-Pagan. Together, we discuss the decision in the travel ban case, as well as the Court’s decision yesterday in Arlene’s Flowers, a case involving a same-sex couple that was refused service by a flower shop because they were gay.  

After the attack on Pearl Harbor, the U.S. placed Americans of Japanese descent in internment camps. Fred Korematsu became a fugitive until he was arrested by military police, placed in an internment camp, and given five years probation. He would eventually take his case to the Supreme Court where he lost in a 6-3 decision. That decision was overturned in the early 80s. Dale Minami, one of his attorneys, tells us about the significance of this case.

On Wednesday’s Gist, you didn’t think Trump’s latest political nominee was scandal-free, did you? And as the Supreme Court weighs Trump’s travel ban on Muslim-majority countries, one of its most notorious decisions still stands. Korematsu v. United States upheld America’s wartime internment of thousands of Japanese Americans, and it’s still cited as legal precedent today. Harvard Law School’s Martha Minow recently wrote about the decision and its relevance in 2018. In the Spiel, president Trump’s approval ratings are highest in West Virginia. Senate candidate (and former convict) Don Blankenship is rolling with it. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Did the U.S. government have the right to round up and detain Japanese American citizens during World War II? Did they present a danger and did the U.S. government act reasonably. Fred Korematsu didn't think so. After Franklin Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066 Korematsu had plastic surgery and tried to conceal his identity. Korematsu was arrested and convicted of violating the local Civilian Exclusion order. He appealed to the Supreme court. The Supreme court upheld the conviction ruling that the government can take extraordinary measures in times of war. It was later looked on as a national shame.

This story comes from the second season of Radiolab's spin-off podcast, More Perfect. To hear more, subscribe here. What happens when the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, seems to get it wrong? Korematsu v. United States is a case that’s been widely denounced and discredited, but it still remains on the books. This is the case that upheld President Franklin Roosevelt’s internment of American citizens during World War II based solely on their Japanese heritage, for the sake of national security. In this episode, we follow Fred Korematsu’s path to the Supreme Court, and we ask the question: if you can’t get justice in the Supreme Court, can you find it someplace else?  The key voices: Fred Korematsu, plaintiff in Korematsu v. United States who resisted evacuation orders during World War II. Karen Korematsu, Fred’s daughter, Founder & Executive Director of Fred T. Korematsu Institute Ernest Besig, ACLU lawyer who helped Fred Korematsu bring his case Lorraine Bannai, Professor at Seattle University School of Law and friend of Fred's family Richard Posner, recently retired Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit  The key cases: 1944: Korematsu v. United States  The key links: Fred T. Korematsu Institute Densho Archives Additional music for this episode by The Flamingos, Lulu, Paul Lansky and Austin Vaughn.  Special thanks to the Densho Archives for use of archival tape of Fred Korematsu and Ernest Besig.  Leadership support for More Perfect is provided by The Joyce Foundation. Additional funding is provided by The Charles Evans Hughes Memorial Foundation. Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project in collaboration with the Legal Information Institute at Cornell.

What happens when the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, seems to get it wrong? Korematsu v. United States is a case that’s been widely denounced and discredited, but it still remains on the books. This is the case that upheld President Franklin Roosevelt’s internment of American citizens during World War II based solely on their Japanese heritage, for the sake of national security. In this episode, we follow Fred Korematsu’s path to the Supreme Court, and we ask the question: if you can’t get justice in the Supreme Court, can you find it someplace else? Fred Korematsu, c. 1940s (Courtesy of the Fred T. Korematsu Institute)   Fred Korematsu, second from the right, is pictured with his family in the family flower nursery in Oakland, CA, 1939. (Courtesy of the family of Fred T. Korematsu, Wikimedia Commons)  The key voices: Fred Korematsu, plaintiff in Korematsu v. United States who resisted evacuation orders during World War II. Karen Korematsu, Fred’s daughter, Founder & Executive Director of Fred T. Korematsu Institute Ernest Besig, ACLU lawyer who helped Fred Korematsu bring his case to the Supreme Court Lorraine Bannai, Professor at Seattle University School of Law and Director of the Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality  Richard Posner, retired Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit The key cases: 1944: Korematsu v. United States The key links: Fred T. Korematsu Institute Densho Archives Additional music for this episode by The Flamingos, Lulu, Paul Lansky, and Austin Vaughn. Special thanks to the Densho Archives for use of archival tape of Fred Korematsu and Ernest Besig.  Leadership support for More Perfect is provided by The Joyce Foundation. Additional funding is provided by The Charles Evans Hughes Memorial Foundation. Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project in collaboration with the Legal Information Institute at Cornell.

In this episode, Yvette and Cynthia process the white supremacist gathering in Charlottesville, discuss what accountability means to them, and analyze Korematsu v. United States - the case that deemed the exclusion of Japanese Americans from the West Coast legal. They call out allies who don't hold their own people accountable, discuss the differences between accountability and punishment, and explain the irony of strict scrutiny. Visit cerebronas.com for links to what we discussed and more! Thanks to @romobeats for the intro tune! Follow us on IG and Twitter at @cerebronas Transition song: Ryan Little – Lucy’s Song

In this episode, Andrew goes through five of the worst, most embarrassing cases in Supreme Court history. First, though, the guys tackle a question from Scott, who's considering becoming a patron of the show (good!) but has some questions about a standard form indemnification clause in the Patreon agreement. In the main segment, we look at the worst of the worst in Supreme Court history.  From the embarrassingly racist to the embarrassingly activist, come visit the Supreme Court's "Hall of Shame" with Andrew and Thomas. After that, fan favorite Breakin' Down the Law returns with an examination of a new mandatory arbitration provision for civil cases in Cook County, Illinois. Finally, we end with a brand new Thomas Takes the Bar Exam question #20.  Remember that TTTBE issues a new question every Friday, followed by the answer on next Tuesday's show.  Don't forget to play along by following our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and/or our Facebook Page and quoting the Tweet or Facebook Post that announces this episode along with your guess and reason(s)! Recent Appearances: Andrew was a guest on Episode 209 of the Phil Ferguson Show; please give it a listen! Show Notes & Links The worst cases in Supreme Court history, in chronological order, are: Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857) Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) (not discussed in this episode) Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905) Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927) Korematsu v. US, 323 US 214 (1944) Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986); and, of course, District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (not discussed in this episode) Support us on Patreon at:  patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ And email us at openarguments@gmail.com  

The third episode of Harry and the Kipper, dealing with the case of Korematsu v. United States and its relevance to current events. Views expressed on this podcast are personal and do not reflect the views of any organization including, without limitation, The Resurgent Left.

In this episode of the Conservative Conscience, Daniel blows up every myth of the Left about an affirmative right to immigrate and violate our national sovereignty.  Daniel goes through the history of immigration law and notes that it is at the core of our foundation that a sovereign nation can exclude anyone for any reason or place any conditions on those here who have not yet become citizens. Daniel takes conservatives to task for cowering in the face of mob rule.  If we have come to a point where we can’t even temporarily suspend immigration from a place like Somalia during a time of out of control terrorism, then we are destined to become Europe.   Moreover, the courts are setting a terrible precedent by violating 200 years of the most settled case law – that the political branches of government have full authority over immigration.  Courts have absolutely no jurisdiction and aliens who are not on our soil (airports don’t count) have no right to judicial review.  If we don’t rein in the courts, they will prevent us from dealing with illegal immigrants as well.   Key Quotes: “It is an accepted maxim of international law that every sovereign nation has the power, as inherent in sovereignty, and essential to self-preservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within its dominions, or to admit them only in such cases and upon such conditions as it may see fit to prescribe.” Nishimura Ekiu v. United States, 142 US 651 (1892). [“the right of a nation to expel or deport foreigners who have not been naturalized, or taken any steps towards becoming citizens of the country, rests upon the same grounds, and is as absolute and unqualified as the right to prohibit and prevent their entrance into the country.”] Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 US 707 (1893). What better authority on this subject than Justice Robert Jackson, the famous Nuremberg prosecutor who was a champion of due process rights (he wrote the dissent in Korematsu v. United States, the Japanese internment case) and regarded as one of the greatest writers of his time? Here is what he had to say: “Due process does not invest any alien with a right to enter the United States, nor confer on those admitted the right to remain against the national will.” Shaughnessy v. Mezei, 345 US 222-223 (1953) (Jackson, J., dissenting). Show Links: Separating fact from fake news on Trump’s executive order Just 14 years ago, Democrats supported cutting off visas from terror-supporting nations Importing the values of the Middle East Boundless Somali immigration poses existential threat Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Just a few weeks into the era of President-elect Donald Trump, and already there is a lot of bruising around the edges of the Constitution. The past few weeks have brought talk of Muslim registries, jail time for flag burners, restrictions on voting and the sweet mystery of the Emoluments Clause. This week, we sit down with U.S. Senator Chris Coons to discuss how much of this talk we should take seriously, and where the true threats to Americans’ constitutional protections lie. We also speak with Neal Katyal, former Acting Solicitor General of the United States, about the 1944 Supreme Court decision that upheld the internment of Japanese-Americans. In 2011, Katyal issued an official apology for the role of one of his predecessors in that case. Korematsu v United Stateshas been in the news again recently, after one Trump surrogate cited it as a “precedent” for a possible Trump Administration program that would require the registration of immigrants from a handful of predominantly Muslim countries. Transcripts of Amicus are available to Slate Plus members. Consider signing up today! Members get bonus segments, exclusive member-only podcasts, and more. Sign up for a free trial here. Amicus is brought to you by the Great Courses Plus, a video learning service with a large library of lectures all taught by award-winning professors. Get a free month of unlimited access when you sign up at TheGreatCoursesPlus.com/amicus. And by First Republic Bank. At First Republic, they take the time to know your business and customize solutions to help you reach your goals. Visit FirstRepublic.com today to hear what their clients say about them. Please let us know what you think of Amicus. Our email is amicus@slate.com. Follow us on Facebook here. Podcast production by Tony Field. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices