Simone Lawson
Justice Frank Murphy was the fifth Supreme Court Justice appointed by Roosevelt, and his dissent in Korematsu v. United States has been a stain on the reputation of the Supreme Court. The decision ruled that the federal government could arrest and intern citizens of Japanese ancestry during World War II, based on fears of a Japanese invasion of the West Coast. Murphy's dissent, along with Justices Jackson and Roberts, was the first Supreme Court decision to mention racism, as he stated that the order was the legalization of racism. He argued that the internment of Japanese Americans violated their Fifth Amendment rights and that racial discrimination had no justifiable part in American democracy. Murphy's stance for individual rights and his condemnation of racism were ahead of his time, and he is remembered for his commitment to justice and civil liberties.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Condemnation of racism | "Legalization of racism" |
| Condemnation of Japanese internment | "Ugly abyss of racism" |
| Support for individual rights | "All residents of this nation...are entitled to all the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution" |
| Opposition to military necessity argument | "Basic principles of justice" should not be reconciled with "military necessity in wartime" |
| Rejection of discrimination | "Obvious racial discrimination" |
| Support for due process | Violation of Fifth Amendment Due Process rights of Japanese-Americans |
| Protection of civil liberties | "Constitutional safeguards" must be maintained during wartime |
| Respect for diversity | "All residents of this nation are kin in some way by blood or culture to a foreign land" |
| Criticism of government action | "Disinformation, half-truths, and insinuations" directed against Japanese-Americans |
| Defense of constitutional boundaries | "There are constitutional boundaries which it is our duty to uphold" |
Explore related products
$15.51 $16.99
What You'll Learn
Justice Murphy's condemnation of racism
Justice Frank Murphy was sworn in as the fifth Supreme Court Justice in 1940. He had a diverse political career before his appointment, serving as a judge on the Detroit Criminal Court, mayor of Detroit, Governor of the Philippines and Michigan, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Attorney General.
Justice Murphy is known for his condemnation of racism and his commitment to civil liberties. In the case of Steele v. Louisiana & Nashville Railroad Co., Murphy harshly criticised the "utter disregard for the dignity and the wellbeing of coloured citizens". He believed that the "accident of birth" should not determine an individual's rights and freedoms.
Murphy's most significant stand against racism came in his dissent in Korematsu v. United States (1944). This case concerned the constitutionality of the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. The majority opinion, written by Justice Hugo Black, emphasised ""military urgency" as the justification for internment. However, Murphy vehemently disagreed, stating that the internment was based on "disinformation, half-truths, and insinuations" directed at Japanese-Americans due to "racial and economic prejudices". He wrote that the internment "falls into the ugly abyss of racism" and that racial discrimination "has no justifiable part whatever in our democratic way of life".
Murphy's dissent in Korematsu was the first Supreme Court decision to use the word "racism". He argued that the exclusion of individuals based on race violated the Fifth Amendment Equal Protection and Due Process rights. His condemnation of racism was considered ahead of his time, and he spent his career championing civil liberties and justice for minority groups.
Murphy's commitment to civil rights was also evident in the case of Ossian Sweet, a black physician charged with murdering a white man. Murphy allowed the defence to present Sweet's previous encounters with racism, contributing to Sweet's successful self-defence argument. Throughout his career, Murphy established systems to aid minorities and protect their civil rights and liberties.
The Constitution: Limiting Powers of Officials
You may want to see also
The Korematsu decision
The ruling has been widely criticized and considered a stain on the reputation of the Supreme Court. It has been compared to other infamous decisions such as Dred Scott v. Sandford and Plessy v. Ferguson, where the Court ruled on the wrong side of history. The decision upheld the constitutionality of internment camps during World War II and was based on the notion of ""military urgency" rather than racial prejudice. However, it has been rebuked for its racist implications and for crossing constitutional boundaries.
Justice Frank Murphy wrote a powerful dissent to the Korematsu decision, in which he condemned the legalization of racism and the violation of the Fifth Amendment Equal Protection and Due Process rights of Japanese-Americans. He stated that racial discrimination in any form has no place in a democratic way of life and that all residents of the United States are entitled to the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. Murphy's dissent is notable for being the first time the word "racism" was used in a Supreme Court decision.
Founding Principles: United States Constitution Explained
You may want to see also
Constitutional power and racism
Justice Frank Murphy was sworn in as the fifth Supreme Court Justice appointed by Roosevelt, making him part of a "New Deal" majority. Murphy's career included a diverse range of political roles, such as judge on the Detroit Criminal Court, mayor of Detroit, Governor of the Philippines and Michigan, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Attorney General.
Murphy's dissent in the Korematsu v. United States case in 1944 is particularly notable for its condemnation of racism and defence of individual rights. The case concerned the constitutionality of internment camps during World War II, specifically upholding the imprisonment of Fred Toyosaburo Korematsu, which was ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court, with the majority opinion emphasising ""military urgency" as the justification for the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.
Murphy's dissent stood out for its explicit mention of "racism", a term that was not used again by another Justice until 1966. He stated that the exclusion of Japanese Americans "goes over 'the very brink of constitutional power,' and falls into the ugly abyss of racism". He further asserted that "racial discrimination in any form and in any degree has no justifiable part whatever in our democratic way of life".
Murphy's stance was based on his belief in the protection of civil liberties and his rejection of policies that crossed constitutional boundaries, even during wartime. He recognised the importance of national defence but argued that citizens' rights and freedoms, as guaranteed by the Constitution, must be upheld regardless of ancestry or race.
In another case, Steele v. Louisiana & Nashville Railroad Co., Murphy again highlighted racial discrimination, condemning "the utter disregard for the dignity and the wellbeing of colored citizens shown by this record". His dissents offer a powerful defence of individual rights and a rejection of racism, demonstrating his commitment to the founding principles of the United States Constitution.
The UN Charter: A Constitution for All Nations
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Justice Murphy's career
Justice Frank Murphy was sworn in as a Supreme Court Justice on February 5, 1940, by the clerk of the Court, Charles Elmore Cropley. He replaced Justice Pierce Butler, who had passed away in November 1939. Murphy had a diverse political career before becoming a Supreme Court Justice. He had served as a judge on the Detroit Criminal Court, also known as the Recorder's Court, where he presided over a significant case involving Ossian Sweet, a black physician charged with the murder of a white man. Murphy also served as the mayor of Detroit, Governor of Michigan, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Attorney General. During his time as Attorney General, he established a Civil Liberties Unit within the Criminal Division of the US Department of Justice, demonstrating his commitment to civil rights and liberties.
In 1944, Justice Murphy dissented in the Korematsu v. United States case, which involved the constitutionality of Japanese-American internment during World War II. He boldly condemned racism and the violation of Japanese-Americans' constitutional rights, stating that the internment was a form of legalization of racism. This dissent was notable as it was the first time the word "racism" was used in a Supreme Court decision. Despite criticism from some of his contemporaries, Murphy was known for his compassion and idealism, often deciding cases based on his sense of justice rather than strict legal theory.
Another notable case where Justice Murphy dissented was Steele v. Louisiana & Nashville Railroad Co. He harshly criticized the "utter disregard for the dignity and the wellbeing of colored citizens" and emphasized the need to protect constitutional guarantees. Throughout his career, Murphy authored 199 opinions, including important cases such as Securities and Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co. (1946), which defined the term "investment contract" under the Securities Act of 1933.
Before his appointment to the Supreme Court, Justice Murphy had a varied career. He served in the U.S. Army during World War I, achieving the rank of captain. After the war, he pursued graduate studies at Trinity College in Dublin and Lincoln's Inn in London, which influenced his judicial philosophy. He then returned to the US and served as Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Michigan. He practiced law in Detroit and was elected to the Detroit Criminal Court in 1923, serving until 1930 when he became the mayor of Detroit during the challenging period of the Great Depression.
In 1933, after his second mayoral term, Roosevelt appointed Murphy as Governor-General of the Philippine Islands, where he advocated for social justice. He remained in the Philippines until 1936, serving as the United States High Commissioner and then as a delegate to the Democratic National Convention. Murphy's diverse experiences and commitment to justice shaped his career as a Supreme Court Justice, where he left a lasting legacy in the realm of civil rights and individual liberties.
Consequences of Breaking the Constitution: What to Expect?
You may want to see also
The Supreme Court's decision
Justice Frank Murphy was sworn in as the fifth Supreme Court Justice appointed by Roosevelt, making him part of a "New Deal" majority. Murphy had a diverse political career before his appointment, serving as a judge on the Detroit Criminal Court, mayor of Detroit, Governor of the Philippines and Michigan, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Attorney General.
Murphy's dissent in the Korematsu v. United States case in 1944 is particularly notable. The case involved Fred Toyosaburo Korematsu, who was arrested for refusing to comply with President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Executive Order 9066, which directed the military to isolate citizens from a 60-mile-wide coastal area from Washington state to California and southern Arizona due to fears of a Japanese invasion after the Pearl Harbor attack. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Korematsu's imprisonment was constitutional, with Justice Hugo Black emphasizing "military urgency" as the justification for internment.
Murphy dissented, stating that the exclusion of Japanese Americans "goes over 'the very brink of constitutional power' and falls into the ugly abyss of racism." He argued that the internment was based on "disinformation, half-truths, and insinuations" directed at Japanese Americans and violated their Fifth Amendment Equal Protection and Due Process rights. Murphy's dissent was a stand for individual rights and a condemnation of racist policies masquerading as national security measures. He wrote, "Racial discrimination in any form and in any degree has no justifiable part whatever in our democratic way of life."
Murphy also dissented in the Hirabayashi v. United States case, where he argued that distinctions based on color and ancestry were "utterly inconsistent with our constitutional tradition." He believed that the discrimination evident in the case conflicted with the principles for which the United States fought and could have negative repercussions internationally. While he was initially persuaded to submit a concurrence, his opinion retained the tone and substance of a dissent.
In another case, Steele v. Louisiana & Nashville Railroad Co., Murphy concurred separately from the majority, harshly condemning the "utter disregard for the dignity and the wellbeing of colored citizens." He felt that the case should not be decided solely on legal technicalities while ignoring the obvious deprivation of constitutional guarantees.
Murphy's dissents in these cases demonstrated his commitment to civil liberties and his willingness to stand against racist policies and discrimination, even during a time of war and national insecurity.
Mercy Otis Warren's Constitutional Concern: A Founding Mother's Fear
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Justice Murphy's dissent was based on the belief that the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II violated their constitutional rights and was an example of "racial discrimination." He argued that the internment was not justified by "military necessity" and that it violated the Fifth Amendment's Equal Protection and Due Process rights.
Justice Murphy's dissent occurred during World War II, following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The U.S. government ordered the internment of Japanese-Americans due to fears of espionage and invasion.
Justice Murphy was the first to use the word "racism" in a Supreme Court decision, and his condemnation of racist policies was considered ahead of his time. He relied on his "instinctive sense of justice" rather than complex legal arguments.
Justice Murphy's colleagues, including Justices Jackson and Roberts, and Justices Frankfurter, tried to persuade him to join the majority opinion to present a united front during wartime. While he officially concurred, his opinion retained the tone of a dissent, and he later dissented in similar cases, such as Korematsu v. United States.
Justice Murphy's dissent in cases like Korematsu has been praised for its principled stand for individual rights and civil liberties. The Korematsu decision has been rebuked and formally overturned, recognizing the injustice of interning Japanese-Americans during World War II.
