{"id":1412,"date":"2020-05-17T14:32:00","date_gmt":"2020-05-17T19:32:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogofnotesite.wpengine.com\/?p=1412"},"modified":"2020-05-21T13:39:26","modified_gmt":"2020-05-21T18:39:26","slug":"korematsu-in-the-age-of-covid-a-note-on-the-constitution-in-times-of-crisis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/korematsu-in-the-age-of-covid-a-note-on-the-constitution-in-times-of-crisis\/","title":{"rendered":"Korematsu in the Age of COVID \u2013 A Note on The Constitution in Times of Crisis"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The case of Korematsu v. United States<\/em><\/a> lives in constitutional infamy<\/a> as the case which upheld the military policy of Japanese internment during WWII. In doing so, the Court\u2014led by former KKK member Justice Black<\/a>\u2014did not deny that Japanese internment constituted a deprivation of constitutional rights. Instead, they found that the deprivation was justified due to the fact that the United States was at war. Because of this justification, Korematsu<\/em> is one of several cases<\/a> which stands for the proposition that constitutional rights\u2014perhaps particularly the equal protection rights of minorities\u2014can be abridged in times of war. However, the United States has not officially declared war on any nation since 1942<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In light of this, then, it is vital to consider whether the Korematsu<\/em> decision can be more widely construed in modern times, and, if it can be, whether that construction provides a basis for the argument that it is acceptable to infringe upon the civil rights of minorities in any time of crisis<\/em>\u2014including a public health crisis like the current COVID-19 pandemic. Indeed, if the holding in Korematsu<\/em> can be so construed, inquiring minds should wonder what crises and which \u201cwars\u201d justify the sort of constitutional intrusion here upheld by the Court\u2014and, perhaps most importantly, against which enemies?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Again, while the U.S. has not officially declared war since WWII, politicians have continued to use the parlance of war to justify policies that disproportionately target and impact racial minorities. For example, massive increases in the policing and prosecution of drug offenders during the so-called \u201cWar on Drugs\u201d led to the systematic and devastating incarceration of black men<\/a>. Similarly, in the wake of 9\/11 and during the \u201cWar on Terror,\u201d<\/a> the Bush administration utilized the broad powers granted by the Patriot Act<\/a> to disproportionately target, harass, and detain Muslim-Americans and those of Arab descent<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Today, the U.S. is likely facing the most impactful crisis in our modern collective history in the form of COVID-19 pandemic, which has killed over 80,000 Americans at time of writing and pushed the economy into a recession<\/a>. And, one of the most concerning aspects of the crisis is how the Trump administration has used it to marginalize Chinese-American and immigrant populations throughout the United States. President Trump has repeatedly insisted upon referring to COVID-19 as the \u201cChinese virus,\u201d<\/a> and, at least partially in response to this rhetoric, hate crimes against Asian-Americans have spiked throughout the country<\/a>. The President has also repeatedly boasted about his \u201cChina ban,\u201d<\/a> wherein he imposed travel restrictions on Chinese nationals entering the United States in early February, despite the virus raging throughout Italy<\/a> at that time as well. And, in keeping with the his administration\u2019s abysmal record regarding the treatment of immigrants, President Trump recently signed a proclamation aggressively preventing legal immigration into the United States by temporarily halting the issuance of green cards<\/a>, supposedly to protect American workers in light of the looming recession. To justify these actions, Trump has taken to calling himself a \u201cwartime president,\u201d and referring to this pandemic as a \u201cwar\u201d<\/a>, which, of course, we\u2019ve seen before, during both the War on Drugs and War on Terror. Indeed, if history is any indicator, these measures may be only the beginning of a regulatory storm that disproportionately negatively impacts both Chinese-Americans, and immigrants more generally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While the Court has rebuked the policy of internment, Korematsu<\/em> has never been officially overturned<\/a>. And, it is worth contemplating whether the Court made this choice purposely, because they were waiting for a moment just like this one. However, in moments like these\u2014when the nation is consumed by panic, and national security and public health seem to be the only things that matter\u2014our constitution, our equal protection and civil liberties are more<\/em> important, not less. In moments like this\u2014in times of crisis\u2014our constitution, and its ideals, still matter. It is undeniable that we are living in uncertain and terrifying times\u2014and, perhaps worst of all, it is unclear when they will end<\/a>. But, just as the First and Second World Wars ended, the \u201cwar\u201d against this virus will one day, too. The decisions that are made now, though, of who we choose to protect and which values we choose to uphold, will be scrutinized by our descendants for decades to come\u2014let us ensure that they are the right ones.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ariana Aboulafia received her J.D., magna cum laude, from the University of Miami School of Law. She has a B.A. in political science and a B.A. in law, history, and culture from the University of Southern California.  <\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The case of Korematsu v. United States lives in constitutional infamy as the case which upheld the military policy of Japanese internment during WWII. In doing so, the Court\u2014led by former KKK member Justice Black\u2014did not deny that Japanese internment constituted a deprivation of constitutional rights. Instead, they found that the deprivation was justified due to the fact that the United States was at war. Because of this justification, Korematsu is one of several cases which stands for the proposition…<\/p>\n

Read More Read More<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":115,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[134,122],"tags":[135,75,114,111,214,213,140],"class_list":["post-1412","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-constitutional-issues","category-covid-19","tag-constitutional-issues","tag-constitutional-law","tag-coronavirus","tag-covid-19","tag-crisis","tag-korematsu","tag-pandemic"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9jSvD-mM","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":1463,"url":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/korematsu-covid-19-and-the-question-of-executive-deference\/","url_meta":{"origin":1412,"position":0},"title":"Korematsu, COVID-19, and The Question of Executive Deference","author":"Megan Lenz","date":"June 8, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cWrong the day it was decided\u201d is a judgment that the Supreme Court reserves for overturning its most egregious prior decisions. One of the cases that most recently received that declaration is Korematsu v. United States, a decision that infamously sanctioned the World War II internment of individuals of Japanese\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "1L Blog Contest"","block_context":{"text":"1L Blog Contest","link":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/category\/1l-blog-contest\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/thomas-de-luze-yVEmozUCyxc-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/thomas-de-luze-yVEmozUCyxc-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/thomas-de-luze-yVEmozUCyxc-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/thomas-de-luze-yVEmozUCyxc-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/thomas-de-luze-yVEmozUCyxc-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/06\/thomas-de-luze-yVEmozUCyxc-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":982,"url":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/sources-of-rights-originalism-and-thayerism\/","url_meta":{"origin":1412,"position":1},"title":"Sources of Rights: Originalism and Thayerism","author":"Joe Blass","date":"April 19, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Photo by Wesley Tingey on Unsplash At Northwestern University Law Review\u2019s Symposium on Originalism 3.0, Professor Steven Calabresi presented a paper critiquing a Thayerian approach to judicial handling of unenumerated rights. The session was moderated by Professor James Pfander, with commentary by Professor Jamal Greene\u00a0of Columbia University Law School. Professor\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Symposium"","block_context":{"text":"Symposium","link":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/category\/symposium\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"brown mallet on gray wooden surface","src":"https:\/\/images.unsplash.com\/photo-1555374018-13a8994ab246?ixlib=rb-1.2.1&ixid=eyJhcHBfaWQiOjEyMDd9&auto=format&fit=crop&w=1000&q=80","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":1481,"url":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/remember-the-past-what-can-a-governor-do-when-the-second-covid-19-surge-comes\/","url_meta":{"origin":1412,"position":2},"title":"Remember the Past: What Can a Governor Do When the Second COVID-19 Surge Comes?","author":"Jeff Thaler","date":"June 9, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Back on January 1st we thought that 2020 would bring clarity of vision and foresight. Since then the world has turned upside down; however, long-standing legal precedent of what states can do in times of epidemics and pandemics has not. Many are claiming that it is unlawful for any governmental\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Constitutional Issues"","block_context":{"text":"Constitutional Issues","link":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/category\/covid-19\/constitutional-issues\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1325,"url":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/the-necessity-of-firearm-stores-during-the-covid-19-pandemic\/","url_meta":{"origin":1412,"position":3},"title":"The Necessity of Firearm Stores During the COVID-19 Pandemic","author":"Adam Sopko","date":"April 22, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Gun owners and would-be gun purchasers are arguing that state measures to prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus infringe on their Second Amendment rights. To the extent the premise is correct\u2014the Second Amendment guarantees access to a firearm store\u2014it\u2019s not clear that their conclusion follows. In response to the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Board member contribution"","block_context":{"text":"Board member contribution","link":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/category\/board-member-contribution\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":1424,"url":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/cruel-exposure-in-unusual-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":1412,"position":4},"title":"Cruel Exposure in Unusual Times","author":"Anthony Moffa","date":"May 22, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"In ordinary times, the conditions on Rikers Island have been unconscionably bad. Now, with the rapid spread of coronavirus, they have become unconstitutionally deadly. Of the more than 1,300 cases that have developed in prisons, 370 come from Rikers alone. And the first inside to die of the disease, Michael\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "COVID-19"","block_context":{"text":"COVID-19","link":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/category\/covid-19\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":609,"url":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/americas-failure-to-recognize-the-right-to-health-a-global-comparison\/","url_meta":{"origin":1412,"position":5},"title":"America’s Failure to Recognize the Right to Health: A Global Comparison","author":"Tushar Parashar","date":"March 13, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"The United States remains\u00a0one of the only countries to not recognize the right to healthcare. As an example, 166 countries have ratified the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, which provides that the \u201cStates Parties . . . recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Board member contribution"","block_context":{"text":"Board member contribution","link":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/category\/board-member-contribution\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogofnotesite.wpengine.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/35797502741_105109a620_h-1024x684.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogofnotesite.wpengine.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/35797502741_105109a620_h-1024x684.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogofnotesite.wpengine.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/35797502741_105109a620_h-1024x684.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1412","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/115"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1412"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1412\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1412"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1412"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.northwesternlaw.review\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1412"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}