Executive Order 9066 was “facially neutral,” you know. https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=74&page=transcript …
-
Show this thread
-
I mean, I'm really trying to understand what the Chief Justice means by distinguishing "that morally repugnant order" from "a facially neutral policy."
8 replies 13 retweets 49 likesShow this thread -
As Greg Robinson says, “The order’s text did not specifically mention Japanese Americans, the West Coast, evacuation, or internment."
1 reply 18 retweets 55 likesShow this thread -
"Nevertheless, nobody inside or outside the government had any doubt that the purpose of the order was to give the army the power to remove the Japanese Americans from the West Coast." By Order of the President, 108.
1 reply 13 retweets 45 likesShow this thread -
Moreover, the order doesn’t actually mention internment at all—what the Chief Justice calls “the forcible relocation of U.S. citizens to concentration camps”—just evacuation.
1 reply 11 retweets 32 likesShow this thread -
Well, not even “evacuation,” I guess, just “exclusion."
2 replies 8 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
So, I'm at a loss as to what distinction the Chief Justice (and the Court) are drawing by saying “it is wholly inapt to liken that morally repugnant order to a facially neutral policy” because as far as I can tell that morally repugnant order was facially neutral.
3 replies 27 retweets 82 likesShow this thread -
I hasten to add, I am not a lawyer and Japanese American internment isn’t even my historical field. But my amateur twitter judgment suggest this is an important failure of reasoning in an important passage of an important opinion.
3 replies 6 retweets 47 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @rauchway
I think the differentiation is that Citizens have more rights, so the balancing comes down in a different equilibrium. But that's not particularly well worked out in the opinion. And seems pretty damn thin.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Two amendments: a) IANAL. b) citizens or US persons
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.