SCOTUS appears to overrule Korematsu, the decision that upheld the internment of Japanese American

[RandySF]

Link to tweet

[UTUSN]

1. So we have to wait 70 years for the current court's *wrong* SHITLER decisions to be overruled?!1

[Fred Sanders]

2. The issue of internment camps has not arisen in 70 years. Is this a broadside to Shitler regarding

his fascist current military base camps plans...even unacceptable in a time of peace?

[UTUSN]

4. Anything I post is a broadside to SHITLER. Whether it's pertinent or not.

What set me off was how long it took to overrule something wrong. Since the specific internment issue hadn't arisen in all that time, WHY WASN'T it brought up? Since we're limiting things to internment, there are survivors alive now, or even civil liberties activists, who could bring it up at any time?

But I don't want to get lost in the legal weeds. I'm reacting to the 70 years that it takes to reverse bad decisions/policies.

As for the short term, regarding the hostile decisions sure to increase when Anthony KENNEDY retires (soon) and gives SHITLER another seat on the court, the current SHITLER court is not going to reverse the bad decisions.

[Baitball Blogger]

3. Somebody brought up a good point.

The Muslim ban is not a Civil Rights issue because these are not American citizens. The Japanese-American internment was definitely a Civil Rights fubar.

We need to be sure we understand the Supreme Court decision, so we know where we're going next. It was a 5-4 decision, which means it can be overturned if we ever get control of the Supreme Court again.

[former9thward]

5. Korematsu was not formally overuled.

From the majority:

Finally, the dissent invokes Korematsu v. United States, 323 U. S. 214 (1944). Whatever rhetorical advantage the dissent may see in doing so, Korematsu has nothing to do with this case. The forcible relocation of U. S. citizens to concentration camps, solely and explicitly on the basis of race, is objectively unlawful and outside the scope of Presidential authority. But it is wholly inapt to liken that morally repugnant order to a facially neutral policy denying certain foreign nationals the privilege of admission. See post, at 26–28. The entry suspension is an act that is well within executive authority and could have been taken by any other President—the only question is evaluating the actions of this particular President in promulgating an otherwise valid Proclamation. The dissent’s reference to Korematsu, however, affords this Court the opportunity to make express what is already obvious: Korematsu was gravely wrong the day it was decided, has been overruled in the court of history, and—to be clear—“has no place in law under the Constitution.” 323 U. S., at 248 (Jackson, J., dissenting).

So Korematsu has been overuled by the "court of history" but not the court itself.