After the attack on Pearl Harbor had soured public sentiment toward Japanese Americans, Endo and other Nisei state employees were harassed and eventually fired because of their Japanese ancestry. The plaintiff in the case, Mitsuye Endo, had worked as a clerk for the California Department of Motor Vehicles in Sacramento prior to the war. The Court also found as part of this decision that if Congress is found to have ratified by appropriation any part of an executive agency program, the bill doing so must include a specific item referring to that portion of the program. United States decision on the same date, the Endo ruling nonetheless led to the reopening of the West Coast to Japanese Americans after their incarceration in camps across the U.S. Although the Court did not touch on the constitutionality of the exclusion of people of Japanese ancestry from the West Coast, which it had found not to violate citizen rights in its Korematsu v. government could not continue to detain a citizen who was "concededly loyal" to the United States. 283 (1944), was a United States Supreme Court ex parte decision handed down on December 18, 1944, in which the Justices unanimously ruled that the U.S. Stone Associate Justices Owen Roberts Įx parte Mitsuye Endo, 323 U.S. The government cannot detain a citizen without charge when the government itself concedes she is loyal to the United States.Ĭhief Justice Harlan F.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |