From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sun Jul 27 2003 - 14:47:56 MDT
On Sun, 27 Jul 2003, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> Or is it the one from 1939 that no court can seem to interpret
> consistently (US v Miller) in which the Justice Dept is documented to
> have lied three times in their arguments before the court? Or is it US
> v Emerson, where the Justice Department under Clinton lied and argued
> contrary to the overwhelming weight of legal scholarship?
Just to clarify, it would seem that the original case is
Korematsu v. United States (1944), e.g.
http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/65.htm
but google will turn up lots of other references.
The PBS special documented that the Justice Dept. presented
disproven/conflicted evidence to the Supreme Court. The
lawyers involved in the appeal (in the 1980's I think)
got the verdicts reversed on a very legal technicality.
Interestingly, Clinton actually awarded Korematsu a
medal apparently for being an American hero (one would
presume in the line of people like Martin Luther King --
people willing to fight to correct injustice).
But the program suggested that the Supreme Court ruling
still stands -- i.e. on the basis of "race" or some other
classification scheme (say one lives in New Hampshire
or one was decended from a criminal sent to Austalia,
or one happened to like eating lutefish) one could be
hauled off and "imprisoned" without due process.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jul 27 2003 - 14:58:39 MDT