Scalia: Internment Camps Could Happen Again

World Events and the Bible

(Anti-War) – Speaking to law students at the University of Hawaii today, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia discussed the Korematsu v. United States ruling of 1944, which affirmed the right of the US government to force people into internment camps regardless of citizenship.

Scalia said it was wrong for the court to make that ruling, and said the case has since been repudiated. At the same time, he cautioned that people are “kidding themselves” if they think the same thing couldn’t happen again.  

“In times of war, the laws fall silent,” Scalia said, adding that he would “not be surprised to see it happen again, in time of war. It’s no justification, but it is the reality.”

Technically speaking Korematsu v. United States was never overturned, but Korematsu’s conviction for evading internment was eventually overturned in 1983, and the Justice Department said the case was “in error” in 2011 and would not be used as the basis for future internment.

Scalia’s assessment of the potential for a repeat of the abuse of internment reflects similar comments from late Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who in 1998 said the question of presidential abuses in wartime was “largely academic” and that “there is no reason to think that future wartime presidents will act differently,” or that future Supreme Courts would be any more willing to stand up to them. – Anti-War: Scalia: Internment Camps Could Happen Again

2 thoughts on “Scalia: Internment Camps Could Happen Again

  1. What he doesn’t realize, or what he didn’t explain to the students, is that as far as political awareness is concerned, today’s population is a bit wiser than they were during WW2, and they’re not likely to let that happen again. The Zionists were the only source of information back then, but today, with each day that passes, fewer and fewer Americans are believing those lies.

    “In times of war, the laws fall silent,” Scalia said

    Actually, that’s not what he said. He used a Latin phrase that expresses the same sentiment, but no one wants to publish it for some reason.
    Anyone know what it is? I’m curious.

    1. I agree with you JR – it is this internet, and websites like this, that are the major difference of the 60+ years since.
      as to the latin phrases: the MSM plays to a 13 yr old, low attention span, audiance that doesn’t deal with anything but sound bite/headline stuff (Latin reads and sounds hoy de toy de snoblike and loses the “low-information’ people) – AND – moreover, the Latin phrases have legal meaning, especially those listed/indexed in Black’s – these phrases/meanings can be “shepardized” with computers to find every (published) usage in every “citable” case in our history – this is not a direction that your government wants you to go.

Join the Conversation

Your email address will not be published.