In this case petitioner, Fred Korematsu, is being charged by the federal district court for breaking Civilian Exclusion order No. 34 and for being found outside of the prescribed area during curfew. The first and main charge towards Korematsu is that he has remained at the military zone which is a direct violation of the Civilian Exclusion Order No.34 (Mr. Justice Black, Opinion of the Court). The second charge promoted against Korematsu is for deliberate breaking of the curfew order. This decision paper supports the idea of discharging the petitioner because of unconstitutionality of the Civilian Exclusion Order No. 34, racial based discrimination in curfew order, and an overall racial discrimination of the people of …show more content…
Civilian Exclusion Order No. 34 has been proposed by the Commanding General of the Western Command, U.S. Army, based upon the rights given to him by the Executive Order No. 9066. Mr. Fred Korematsu has knowingly broken this order as an act of protest and is currently charged for that. Even though Executive Order No. 9066 has given power to the Secretary of War to Prescribe Military Areas, this Executive Order did not declare Martial law and did not give The Secretary of War the power to break constitution. Since the Martial law has not been declared the standard civilian rights and constitutional laws are still in act on the territory of the United States in the created Military Zones. In this case, the Civilian Exclusion Order No. 34 which stated that all people of Japanese descent must be excluded from the military zone clearly violates the 5th Amendment that states “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger” (5th Amendment). This Civilian Exclusion Order No. 34 also violates the 14th Amendment Section