Transcripts For CSPAN3 Landmark Cases Supreme Court Landmark Case Korematsu V. United States 20240712

Exploring the human stories and constitutional dramas behind 12 Historic Supreme Court decisions. Number 7 59. Since row against weighed. Quite often, and very famous decisions, are ones that corked took that were quite unpopular. Let us go through a few cases that illustrate very dramatically and visually, what it means to live in a society of 310 million different people who helped stick together because they believed in the rule of law. Good evening and welcome to cspan and the National Constitution centers landmark cases. Tonight, we are going to be examining a 1944 war powers case of the Supreme Court. It is the story of korematsu v. United states. Aaa iaea detained through the course of the war. Mr. Korematsu said that was wrong. We have two people helping us learn the story. Peter irons is the civil rights attorney and editor of ten books including justice at war, the story of the japanese american internment cases. In the course of researching his book on this case, he found that the government used tainted evidence to convict russia korematsu and to justify the internment of americans and helped overturn the conviction. Thank you for being here. Yay Karen Korematsu is the daughter of mr. Korematsu. Glad to have you at the table tonight. We are going to start with the big picture and when this case came to the court, exactly what were they asked to decide . What was the issue . The issue was whether the government could single out a particular group of people solely on the basis of the race or ethnicity. And pull them in literally, concentration camps indefinitely without any due process, without a hearing, a lawyer, a trial. Whether this would justify under the governments power as they assert detained, to protect the country from potential espionage or sabotaged by members of this group. There was an issue that really, at the time, very few people, particularly outside of the west coast had any real knowledge of japanese americans and sort of thought that well, this group looks like the enemy, and they may actually support the japanese, so it is better to round them up and put them away, and the president has the power to do this under the war powers of the constitution. That was the issue. What makes it a landmark case . It is a landmark case because first of all, the Supreme Court in a six to three ruling upheld the governments power to do this, and Fred Korematsus conviction for violating the report that he made for these internment candidates, the court upheld that. That set a precedent. We could say today, it is very unlikely to happen here. This is just an aberration in our constitutional history. But i dont really think it is because for one thing, even Justice Scalia recently said, this could happen again, so we have to be on the lookout and the alert at all times. Are we in a situation where some other group, whether it is arab americans or any other group, comes under this kind of hostility and scrutiny, and as one of the Supreme Court justices dissenting in the case said, this principal lies around like a loaded weapon, ready for the hand of any authority with a plausible reason. Looking at the history of the time as you have studied it, Karen Korematsu, was this particular to japanese americans . On the east coast there were threats of submarines coming to the United States where german americans ever rounded up or about to be rounded up . Why were japanese americans singled out . There were some german americans and Italian Americans that were put into some of the prisons and camps, but they were on a case by case basis. With the japanese americans, they were singled out because they quote, looked like the enemy and so therefore, that was why they were rounded up without any due process and put in these american concentration camps. It was racially based . It was racially based. Even Justice Robert jackson and murphy, even in their decisions said that it had to do with racial discrimination. Will you tell us in your book that there was a long history of biased pretty prejudice two words asians coming to the United States like back in 1880, was the chinese exclusion act. Set the stage before the 1940s, the feeling of the majority white americans, especially on the west coast for asians coming to this country . There had been, as you said, hostility toward Asian Americans ever since chinese immigrants came to this country. Largely, they worked on real roads and minds and agriculture. But there was a very powerful Nativist Movement and largely from organized labor which is sort of odd because they saw them as competition. Low wage competition. So as you said, Congress Passed a law in 1880. The chinese exclusion act. At that time, there were very few japanese americans. But when they started coming to this country around the turn of the 20th century, in larger numbers, Congress Actually passed a law singling them out as what they called aliens ineligible for citizenship. Japanese were the only people who could not become naturalized citizens and so they remained alien. Many of them had lived in this country for many years. They were loyal to this country. They brought up their children to be loyal americans. Of course, the children who were born here were birthright citizens. That is a somewhat controversial topic now, but they were american citizens. And so, but the hostility, particularly when japan became aggressive in asia toward china, manchurian so forth. The people be gantry here but there would be an outbreak of war and hostility with the japanese. But the interesting thing is, after the japanese bombed pearl harbor in december of 1941, for more than one month, there was no organized call to deport or in turn or round up japanese americans, and newspapers were saying, they are loyal americans. We do not need to give into the fears. But then, the press on the west coast and politicians started saying, we have to end the farmer Growers Association in california, they said this is white mans country. They actually said that. So this began to build up. And exerted pressure on president roosevelt, who finally capitulated and issued the order, which im sure we will talk about in a minute. That gave the military the power to detain, exclude any person of any ancestor, that only japanese americans were singled out. You just touched on the back story that needs to be emphasized. Especially with the agriculture. The japanese were doing so well up and down the west coast, that a lot of people were very jealous. There was kind of what we are today, they are taking away our jobs. They are taking away our opportunities. Our land. As we do in this country, we go into other countries where we can get cheap labor and especially before japan at the turn of the century, when the economy was very poor, they went into the prefectures and the counties where it was highly agriculture, and they said come to america. Its the land of opportunity. That is how my grandfather came to the west coast. No different than what they did to the chinese, and now what we are doing especially for the mexicans that come up from mexico. If you have been watching the series with us, you know an important part of it is your involvement in it. There are three ways you can do it. You can call us in about 15 minutes or so. Well begin taking calls. You can also send us a tweet at cspan and use the hashtag landmark cases. We will make sure your twitter questions and comments will be here throughout the program. You can go to cspans facebook page. The comments are already lining up under there. Please join us in this conversation on korematsu v. United states during a time of war, to take away civil liberties. That is really what the question is here. It has lots of important elements for our society today. So we are going to show a video that is about the pearl harbor attack and this is a government film on japanese relocation. Lets watch. December 7th, 1941 a date which will live in infamy. When the japanese attacked pearl harbor, it our west coast became a potential combat zone. For more than 100,000 persons of japanese origin, two thirds of them are american citizens. Military therefore determined, should have to move. Now the actual migration got underway. The army provided to transport household belongings and buses to move the people to assimilate centers. The evacuees cooperated wholeheartedly. Behind then they left shops and homes that the occupied for many years. They were taken to race tracks where the army could build assembly plants. They lived here until communities could be completed on federally owned land. The army provided housing and plenty of helpful, nourishing food for all. At each reLocation Center, evacuees were met by japanese who arrive some days earlier. The newcomers were curiosity. There in the new area on land for all, contained and full of opportunity. Here they would be schools, educate their children, reclaim the center. This picture is actually a pro up to a story that is yet to be told. The full story will begin to unfold when the desert turns green, when oil sands are protected on public land. It will be fully told only when circumstances and once again to enjoy the freedom we in this country sherisse. And we hope it has that this country. In the meantime, we are setting a standard for the rest of the world in the treatment of people who may have royalty for elimination. So there we see the government take on all of this. How is the country reacting once the order was given . While the action was actually very unusual because as the propaganda film said, the vast majority of japanese americans cooperated because they had no choice. Where else could they go . What would happen to them . And what would happen to their families, their children, their parents and grandparents . So they did cooperate and go into the camps but the camps, as im sure anyone whos been in them could tell you, were not like this propaganda film. And so most americans didnt think about it, it wasnt an issue that really concern them. They were stuck away on indian reservations and the desert and the mountains of the west and even in the swamps of arkansas. And for most of the war, most people did even think about what was going on. Plus there was a war going on and people have sons who were overseas fighting and their focus was on america winning the war. Your folks, your relatives and people like them werent in these in tournament camps. Lets bring fred into the store at this point. Hold was you on the order was given . He was 23 years old. What had he been doing up to that point . He actually had been a welder. He had tried to actually enlist in the service even before the top of the draft. He and his buddies wanted to have stay together, so they thought they would apply and first they applied to the National Guard and when they went to the post office to enlist, but the military officer refused to give my father an application. And that was even before, you know, the before pearl harbor. My father always wanted to support, you know, the military effort and he decided to go to Welding School and get his license and then became a wilder. But even then he was fired as pearl harbor got closer and just because he was of japanese, you know, ancestry, even though he was an american citizen born in oakland, california. The executive order at stake was what exactly that if they are gave . It was nine zero six six. This was an executive order which was later followed up by the act of congress that made violation what the executive order did was to empower the military, the west Coast Military commander general john dewitt, to issue orders that would exclude any or all persons from designated military zones. The whole west coast was a designated military zone all the way to the Canadian Border to mexico extending inward several hundred miles at the state of arizona, california, oregon, washington. And so the order was openended but it was only applied to japanese americans. And so what general dewitt did systematically starting in washington across from seattle, all the way down to san diego, was issue these Exclusion Orders which said that they had to report that you see within a week and they had to report to these Assembly Centers. As the propaganda film said, they were in racetracks and fairgrounds. The conditions rupture terrible. But they had no other choice. And if they resisted, they were subject to criminal penalties and this is what motivated not only karens dad, but also to other japanese americans were a man born in seattle, who was a student in washington and a man in portland, oregon, was a lawyer. They both refused to report for interment and they violated the curfew that general dewitt had imposed on japanese americans. And so they were all charged by the government, all convicted, and their cases all went to the Supreme Court. Our next video is actually Fred Korematsu about his actual family life and his period in his life. Lets watch. At the nursery, my parents they were all around the radio listening. They were not saying very much. My mother was crying. My father was was disgusted. What my parents did to then or see, what was going to happen . A few days later, the police came down their income skated all flashlights and cameras. They confiscated everything that they thought we would use for signaling. See before the war, my parents were very proud people. They always talked about japan, you know, and also about the summarize and stuff like that. And, after pearl harbor, they just kept it to themselves. They were afraid to talk about it. I thought the Exclusion Order would be only for aliens. Those that were born in japan i did not think that it would go as far as to include american citizens. So Karen Korematsu, did your grandparents go to the camps . Oh yes, every one of japanese ancestry along the west coast was forced. But your father was not . That is correct, my father was the son of four boys. As i said he was 23 years old at that time, so he was old enough to be more independent and he learned about the constitution in high school. And thought he had, you know, civil rights as an american citizen. So i member him telling me that if, you know, first day thought that maybe, you know, something might happen to his parents because even though they had wanted to become citizens, they werent. But certainly the american citizens would be protected. So he, you know, once this order was issued when, he just didnt think it was right and, you know, all due process was basically, you know, thrown out the window. There was never any charges, never any hearings, never access to an attorney or your day in court. So he, you know, just wanted to get on with his life as an american citizen and thats what he decided to do. He also had a personal reason. He did. He had an Italian American girlfriend. Thank, you Italian American girlfriend, not my mother. And because she said she would have never deserted him but that was another reason. How american is that to, you know, want to stay behind because, you know, you just want to stay with your girlfriend and just be unamerican . And thats all he ever wanted to do. How did he get arrested . It was on a Street Corner in california, which is a suburb next to oakland in the San Francisco bay area and he was supposed to meet his girlfriend that day on the corner and he went into this kind of Little Corner store to buy some cigarettes and he thinks he was spotted, somebody recognized him, so he was on the corner and then all of a sudden the rock Police Showed up and said something to him like, have you seen any sure japanese guys around here my my father said, no and then the military police came and so that was it. And then they took him first to jail and then oakland and then the federal jail in San Francisco. They didnt know what to do with him. So what are the important things to know about Fred Korematsus initial steps with the law . While the initial steps were very rudimentary, say the least. Fred was put in, as karen said, into the federal jail and while he was there, he was visited by the director of the Northern California aclu a man named earnest. And earnest read about freds arrest in the use paper and he was hoping to find somebody who would be willing to undertake a test case but this was a test case that had no guarantees success whatsoever but fred said, okay, i will do it. There were two other japanese americans who have been picked up, later sent to the camps who were unwilling to do this. They just wanted to get this over with. But fred said, no, i will do this, so they held a trial. The interesting thing about the trial is that, first of all, it lasted less than one day. There was only one witness against fred and that was the fbi agent who interrogated him after he was arrested. There were only two questions asked that the hearing, are you a japanese american, which he obviously was. Secondly, did you violate the Exclusion Order, which he obviously did. So you are guilty. The judge actually in that case instructed the jury that they had to find friend guilty and his defense attorney tried to argue constitutional issues, the judge dismissed all of it. But one interesting thing, susan, is that one after the judge declared that fred was guilty he the sentence he imposed was probation, which normally means that you are free to go about as long as you report monthly to a probation officer. But as soon as fred had posted the bail, which was very small, for mr. Besig actually wrote the check. Earnest besig wrote the check and walked out the court room as a free man. They were military Police Standing in the doorway with guns drawn and said, we have orders to take him into custody and besig said, wait a minute, you cant do that, but judge has already put him on probation, hes free to go and they said, we are sorry, thats our orders. They took fred away and that was right before he was sent to the interment camp. When you talk to your father and later years, was a 23yearold, did he understand the significance of his decision to go forward with this case . I dont think he really knew the impact, but his decision was very simple it was not complicated. He thought the government was wrong to incarcerate 120,000 people of japanese ancestry. He was right to take a stand. He lived by his principles of right and wrong. Not everyone can say that. That he was this kind, very gentle person. And he truly believed in what he was doing. How did it japanese americans who were interned, react to fred standing up against this and in fact deciding to go forward with this . From the time that he entered birth, he went to the detention Assembly Center in the San Francisco bay area where everyone was designated first. That was the temporary quarters that were basically horse stalls. Dysentery was rampant throughout the track. Food was bad. That is where he ended up first, and so his once everyone knew that he was there, one of his brothers and the community of japanese american man said, they wanted to have a meeting to determine whether or not my father should even pursue his legal case. They did. They did not really include my father in that discussion. Afterwards, my fathers oldest brother talked to my father and my father asked, what did they say . They said, well we do not think you should continue. He was really vilified from day one, because they thought that at the associated with my father, some harm i come to them. They thought that he was just too good for himself. Basically, he was ostracized. As we were until his case was reopened in 1983. That remain an issue in your family over the course of a lifetime . Not such a big issue. I did not really even know about it until later years. Did the brothers ever have a falling out . Not really. They were, later on, they became closer again. Most people just do not want to make waves with the government. Is that what was going on . The psychology of it all . That is right. There were no real alternatives. The only alternatives were to go to the camp willingly, but under duress of sorts, because you had no other choice. Or you go to jail. There were no other choices. Fred took the one that was a very minority view, willing to undergo the legal process, be convicted, because there was no question that he would be found guilty. And risk going to the prison for a year. They finally sent him to one of the camps, but the point is, when his case went through the court up to the Supreme Court, very few people had any sympathy for not only fret, but japanese americans in particular. The military in fact was tremendously hostile. General de wit who had issued the order and had said publicly, a chap is a chap. There is no such thing as a loyal japanese. It is impossible to determine their loyalty. With the odds stacked against them like that it was very unlikely that they would find much sympathy even on the Supreme Court. You saw the governments case, socalled propaganda film that they made to tell people what was going on with the japanese internment. In a few minutes, we will show you a video of what the next stop and Fred Korematsus saga was, which was in utah. The topaz internment camp, and what it looks like today. Until we do that, we will start talking, or taking telephone calls. We will begin with jordan who is watching us from miami. Hello jordan. Hi. Readings. I just wanted to say that this series is very informative. I am a brandnew attorney who just passed the florida bar, and the series really gives an insight to a side of the law and a side of these great Supreme Court cases that you just dont get any way, my question is, where it is this case rank as one of the worst in the courts history, up there with the dred scott decision . And what certainly what really disturbs me is, can this really happen again, this blatant violation of due process and our Constitutional Rights as americans . Those are really good questions. I will quote, and i normally dont, but i will quote Supreme Court Justice Anthony scalia. I dont often agree with his opinions, but just as cleo said, korematsu ranks with dred scott and plessy versus ferguson. The three worst decisions ever in the Supreme Court. The question of whether this can happen again, unfortunately, the court has not ever overturned or had the occasion to overturn the korematsu decision. Technically, it stays on the books, and as i quoted Justice Jackson saying earlier, it lies around like a loaded weapon, ready for the hand of any authority with a possible reason. We may say of course this isnt going to happen again. We are much more decent and tolerant as a society today. But to think that history can never repeat itself is really not something we should do. On twitter, john young wants to know, how did the authorities differentiate the japanese descent and people from other Asian Countries . Very good question. At the time, the chinese developed these little buttons, like the lapel buttons that they wore and it said, i am chinese. So that they would not be confused with the japanese and japanese americans. Certainly, everyone kind of lived in the Rural Communities at the time. It was very easy to kind of figure out where everyone was. The government, actually, had really been what we call racial profiling these people, years before. How in the world did they end up rounding up at least 2000 people the day after the bombing of pearl harbor . If they did not or had not done that kind of research . The same thing as they did after 9 11. So, the communities already had been targeted. And of course, last names and i. D. S were also a big difference. Japanese names are more in syllables, japanese chinese and japanese. Arent hi jim, you are on. I am and retired attorney. As to the horror of this case, my question is how do we how can a court, any court or judicial system, set up safeguards so that an executive order, if this comes down again, it isnt and the court makes a ruling and overturns korematsu, its still in the end not going to mean anything, because the executive department and the military will do exactly what they are told to do . Thank you. That is a really good question, because it goes back to the issue that came up before the Supreme Court in korematsu in 1944. What are the limits of the governments powers under the constitution, particularly the executive branch, to issue orders that are and exercise of the president s power to direct National Security and Foreign Policy . The courts have been very reluctant to intrude upon that power. That is why they have what is called, judicial deference. If the military if the president makes an order and says, this is in support of my powers under the constitution, the courts are very reluctant to say, well you have gone too far. On this series, you will hear a case in which the Supreme Court said, yes the president did go too far. When he sees the Steel Companies during the korean war. But during world war ii, there was no real check. The only check was the conscience and judgment and character of the members of the Supreme Court. They were the only people who could have put a stop to this. Next is steve watching us from delaware. Thank you. Welcome to the program. There is a pretty big asian population. Here real quick i would say that korematsu is the greatest Asian American i can think of. Second, pretty much as people have said already, and limited power of government during wartime korematsu really had the implication of u. S. Versus edward snowden, because now we have Unlimited Power during wartime. I think the absence of judicial review of this power in korematsu, it was a very confusing president and the war on drugs and the war on terror and cyber warfare and drone warfare. As long as you put the word war, the government that power. Nobody has ever mentioned the deprivation of Property Rights of 100,000 japanese americans. inaudible this is what the british did to the americans before the independence war. During wartime, the citizens have Property Rights. To vacate the entire west coast, separating japanese Property Owners from their property. What is the reparations for that . The government does not want to go back to the reparations of slavery, so they do not want to revisit korematsu versus the usa. Thank you very much. Clear lets do that in reverse order. We saw on that video that people had Bank Accounts taken away, businesses were closed. Where those assets taken permanently or where they return to them after the interview was over . For the most part, people just lost everything. Some may have had some money returned to them, but that was a very small percentage. Most of the japanese farmers were just renting land. Now, there were some cases where the caucasian neighbor may be farm the land for the japanese american who is incarcerated. When they came back, they got back the land. But that was not the majority. Fortunately, my grandfather was able to buy land in east oakland in a commercial zoned area, before the alien land law took effect on august 10th, 1913. Before they were forcibly removed from their home, he went to the bank and there was an immigrant banker there who took care of the land. When they came back, it was back in ruin. The greenhouses and the grass was all broken down. The house had been vandalized. The plants were stolen. Most people just lost everything because they were just renting. They had to leave everything behind. The important part of this is also to point out that even though there were reparations later on, it did not compensate for what was lost. Because you could only carry it into hands what you could take with you. What was about 50 pounds each. You had to either try to sell for ten dollars or give it to a friend, hoping that they may take care of your possessions. And a lot of cases the neighbors did not think the neighbors the people were coming back. They would get rid of the property and the possessions and sell them and use them or whatever. It was a terrible condition a validation of human rights. I dont want to use up too much time on this, but referencing edward snowed and for example. They are not exactly comparable, because the government does have the power to prosecute people. Pass laws, making a criminal to actually harm the United States in any way. During wartime or even during peace time. But the point is, but the japanese americans had done nothing that was criminal, except resistance to the internment. There was no crime that they were accused of. The whole premise of roosevelts executive order was protection of the west coast against espionage and sabotage. During the entire war, there was not a single case of espionage or sabotage of any japanese american. You could say, well that is because they were all locked up in the internment camps. But the point is, that during the time before that happened, the army, the navy, the federal Communications Commission and Government Agencies were looking, and the fbi, were looking everywhere they could for evidence that people were signaling to the japanese trying to communicating with them. They found nothing. I many years was your family interned. Over two and a half years. Three. We are going to show it video from the camp topaz, which is, i mentioned is and delta utah. We will see what it looks like to danny will get a real sense of what people faced when they got off those buses and saw what their life was going to be like. Fred korematsu and his family would have raised here in september of 1942. This is what they would have seen. Freds family would have arrived in delta by train and they would have been in here would be the administrative area and then back in here would have been over 600 barriers. All lined up so there were about 250 people in each block, six barracks on one side, six bags on the side. Baird nine wouldve been right here and that is where the korematsu family lived. This is a recreation of one of the barracks. The bears were 20 feet wide and hundred 20 free long and they were divided into six different rooms. This particular room that we have recreating here is 20 feet by 20 feet. Oddly, it is the same size room as Fred Korematsus found the wouldve lived in. This is cots and came from topaz. Everyone was given a mattress, just a cotton mattress with two Army Blankets so these wouldve been the kind of mattresses and cots that korematsu slept on. When people came from tan fran many of the rooms werent finish. They didnt have sheet rock, they dont have ceilings, even have mason out on the floors. They wouldve been freezing even in the daytime. Only heating they wouldve had wouldve been a potbellied stove but this would have not been able to heat the entire room in a comfortable kind of way. In the winter, it was freezing cold here but in the summer because the outside of the barracks recovered with black tar paper, it wouldve absorb the heat and it wouldve been stifling. What was daily life like for people . What did they do to occupy their time . One of the government provide . You said they only had 50 pounds worth of their own belongings, so how do they pass the time . Well the japanese americans were very resourceful they, you know, for the most part they said we have to get on with our lives so they, the parents want to schooling for their children so they had to kind of make this makeshift classrooms in these barracks and sometimes they were able to bring in some teachers. I even remember george to kay who now has his opening broadway show allegiance in new york. He said he remembers like looking out, you know, the window of this when his classroom was, the berry, just looking at desolate land. There was baseball, finally. There was some baseball teams. People finally had some music so they either had instruments sent in, they had some dance bands. There was foist coats in girl scout troops there so they had their churches. They try to slowly but surely make the best of a terrible, horrible situation. So we have another video to show you, just to get a sense of this. This is a very rare piece of video. Its a whole movie made by another in tierney, his name is dave tests to know. He was also in the topaz camp. He snuck a camera and in recorded some of the scenes of what was like for people there and later on he made a documentary film about the experience. Lets watch. Does this is a shot of the evacuees doing a volunteer work, repairing the pipes which broke. Look they had used poor material and we had a volunteer crew repair the pipes. And here we have the dust storm. Look this was taken on a long sunday afternoon and everyone had to keep their windows closed shut tight and it was very hot, no air conditioning and the wind blew and the dust blue and the dust would come inside the cracks in the windows and the doors. White blue and blue. You are cooped up inside your barrack. And then my brother tucked into camp to visit us and the sad part is lucky is wearing a u. S. Army uniform, he had to come through u. S. Army guards to come to visit his family. Peter, can you pick up on the last point . There were probably other men they of military age, how did the government treat them if they were interested in serving in the war . Well it was a very complicated situation because initially the military resistant, people in the army resisted and the involvement of japanese americans as soldiers but they finally decided, mostly as a Public Relations gesture, that they would set up a separate battalion, the four 42nd battalion, it was caused, composed of japanese americans most of whom came up the caps and volunteered to serve their country fighting against an enemy that use concentration camps while their own parents were in camps. This became they were sent to european they were sent to european theater. They fought violently particularly in italy. They suffered the greatest casualties of any battalion in the most decorated. One u. S. Senator, the late senator in a way, one away from hawaii, was a member of the 442nd, he lost an arm during the war. So they fought violently but there were other internees in camp, young man, who resisted the draft. This is a little known, little told story. And they said, as long as they are being locked up simply because of our race, why should we fight for a country that treats us like this . And they refused to go. They were known as the resist airs. Many of them were convicted, sent to prison finally president truman, after the war, pardon them all but it was sort of a mixed thing because the army treated them as a special as they also did with African American soldiers during the war it was a segregated army and they fought for their country, they suffered and died for their country but they were not treated as real americans. In fact there were a series of questions asked about people in internment camps. Here are a sample related to service. Question 27 in this floaty form, are you willing to serve in the on forces in the United States on combat duty, whenever ordered . Question 28, will you swear unqualified allegiance United States of america and faithfully defend the United States from any or all it by foreign or domestic forces and for swear any form of allegiance or beatings to the japanese emperor or any foreign or government, Power Organization . Those who answer no and thats the story you are telling that later on they were forgiven for that. I want to take a couple of more calls and then the next stage is this case moving to the Supreme Court. We will find out how that happened. Dulles listen to martha whos watching us and martin bill, virginia. You are on the air. I, martha. Hi, i just wanted probably the questions been asked but i just remember, im 68 years old, but i should remember when my mother was when i was eight years old, she taught me all about this, it was outrageous. This was in the early sixties and she had just been a teenager but she was still feel mad at with the japanese were treated. We are from virginia, not really a liberal state, but she was outraged by it. What i wanted to know was how did the centers on the Supreme Court decision, how did they make their judgment . What was the reason for dissenting against the majority . Okay, thank you for asking that. We havent gone to that yet and if you dont mind we will hold the question until we do. Lets take a call next from marvin who is in los angeles. Marvin, you are on the air. Go ahead please. Im a retired High School History teacher and the introduction to your program uses Justice Breyer saying hes talking about the rule of law. I dont understand how the violation of the fifth amendment, section nine and article four would in the right of a trial by jury could be ignored by somebody like Justice Douglas . Thats the first part. The second thing i wanted to say is, i wonder if you know that at one time in the Early Administration of president obama, a japanese american was three persons away from being president of the United States. Senator in a way was the president of the United States senate and the first would be the vice president. The second would be the speaker of the house and the third person in line to be president the United States would be a japanese american whose friends were put into places like mans an are and many others. Thank you very much for the program. You are topping even the first lady and thats quite a task. Thank you so much, marvin. So what is your reaction to marvins comments they are about the way history came full circle in this . Well its very interesting comment because the idea that when something terrible happens in the country, particularly ours, where we take our rights very seriously, that once we have advanced past that and we have come to understand, the same thing happened, it is still segregation for example, we got past School Segregation but in a sense, we never left behind because to get ahead of things our schools are still segregated in many places. And the idea that things like this cant happen again. Marvin talked about the rule of law. Members of the Supreme Court of course and all Public Officials in this country take an oath to defend the constitution of the United States and the constitution has these particular guarantees. We mention the fourth amendment, the fifth amendment, the right to trial by jury. You cant be sentenced to incarceration without a trial, without charges being brought against you. All of this was ignored, lost over by the Supreme Court in the korematsu case. Next up is william and denver, colorado. Hi, william, you are on. Thank you very much. Mine is more of a personal war comment. I was aware very much for mentioned early on became a very distinguished leader and i was honored many years ago to have received a civic award that was dedicated to him. At the same time i should say it is true that the post 9 11 actions by the congress for, the patriot act, etc, it reminds us that this could happen over and over again and that we do have to be forever vigilant but also, as you just for mentioning, how important it is that the hope plan in the end, people were displaced but they didnt lose faith, that they came back and the country is stronger perhaps for them. Thank you. William, thank you for the comments. Next we are going to show you that there was widespread debate on the fdr administration at the constitutionality of the japanese interim the program. The Justice Department acknowledges the government knew about the japanese americans posing their security would form the basis for korematsu fours case later on in his life. Lets watch. These are the documents we pulled from the fdr Library Archives that gives you an indication of the discussions in the debate that went on over the discussion about whether or not to interned japanese americans on the west coast in United States. This one a very interesting, its from the assistant to the attorney general of the United States from james wrote to fdr actually fdr secretary asking her to kind of alert the president to the situation thats going on a california. He says it looks like it might explode any day now there is a huge amount of public pressure to move them out of california. Citizens and aliens alike. He also says recovery will require suspension of heaviest corpus that we should have another Supreme Court fight on our hands. So he is clearly concerned about the legal implications in the constitutionality of trying to interned japanese americans. Heres a document from the attorney general of the United States, france and middle to fdr. First he identifies in the opening thorough grab paragraph that there clearly is a racist element involved in this discussion of trying to intern japaneseamericans during the war. He says that west coast people distrust the japanese, various special Interest Groups would welcome their removal from good farmland, and the elimination of competition. But, he says, in spite of that, my last advice on the War Department is that there is no evidence of imminent attack. From fdr, that there is . No evidence of plan sabotage. He is dismissing the fundamental arguments in favor of interning japaneseamericans. Here, actually, is the actual text of the executive order. This document is actually not all that specific, in terms of which nationalities or ethnic group might be ultimately affected by it. What it does is it defines this idea that the department of war has the authority to create his military exclusion zones. These will be fairly large areas on the west coast of the u. S. As a result of this, under this authority, the japaneseamerican community on the west coast, including american citizens, would be moved into internment camps. We see that there were people within the fdr administration who predicted there be a court challenge. How in fact that Fred Korematsu s case get to the Supreme Court . After fred was convicted, there was an appeal. The appeal went to the ninth Circuit Court of appeals, which did not decide the case, it just send it on to the Supreme Court and the court had already decided in 1943, the cases of gordon but those involved be curfew. And the curfew was considered much less is of a burden on japanese americans. After all it only said you had to be in your homes between 8 pm and 5 am. But the interment itself, the Exclusion Order, was the issue before the court it is very clear, now, in hindsight, that the court was misled. But the point, i think that is even more important, is that it was clear at the time, there were government officials, including attorney general, and several of the Justice Department lawyers who were involved in these cases who said no, we cant do this it violates the constitution. In what became, i think, one of the great tragedies of american law, the governments highestranking lawyer, the solicitor general of the United States, got up before the Supreme Court and said, this is something we have to do because the president and the congress have decided on this. Were not going to challenge them. Were not going to secondguess them. There are americans lying at the bottom of pearl harbor who were killed by the japanese and we have to be vigilant about this. So, in our last weeks case, which was a world war i case, we learn that the justices were really imbued with a lot of patriotism during the time of the war and world war i, was it the same sort of feeling that these justices wanted to support the war effort . It was, almost exactly. In contrast to the decision in the previous case, which was unanimous, the decision in freds case was a split decision, as you said, 63. But, what is very interesting, is some of the most liberal justices on the court, by reputation, and historical account, just as hugo black for example, who wrote the opinion upholding Fred Korematsus conviction. Justice William Douglas considered the great liberals of the court, they voted to uphold the conviction. There were three justices, however, dissented and every constitutional scholar agrees that these defense by these three justices completely of this rated, obliterated the reasoning in justice blacks opinion. They pointed out they made to serious points. Abject deference to the executive even during wartime is not a function of the judiciary. It is upholding the constitution. Secondly, that this was decided simply on the basis of race. They made that point as Justice Murphy said, i dissent from this legalization of racism. And very soon, after these decisions, within a year, one of the most noted law professors in the country, professor at eugene of Yellow School wrote in the yale law journal, saying that the korematsu case is a constitutional disaster. This is not something that 40, 50, 60, 70 years later, we say oh, that was a mistake back then. They had no reason at the time, except to uphold what they thought was a patriotic duty. For the record, i want to get some of this on the screen, so people can have the reference here it first of all, the chief justice at the time was harlan. He was appointed by whom . What was his persuasion . He was appointed by herbert hoover. He was a republican. He would not have be a republican today because, he was, in fact, one of the great chief justices we have had. Also a number of other names have become famous to people. You mentioned Justice Douglas, justice frankfurter. The constitution of the court was what at this time . Eight of the nine members of the court with the exception seven of the nine members, with the exception of justices dont and jackson had been appointed by fdr. They were the new deal justices when fdr threatened to pack the court back in the 1930s by adding new justices, he finally got his wish. He appointed a majority of the court. These were people who owed some sort of personal and institutional loyalty to the court. In this particular case, during wartime, it is very hard for anybody, including a member of the Supreme Court, to say as long as the president is in the constitution, and what would be the implications of that. Japanese ancestry from the west coast near military installations and more time in the court said . Yes. Second question, should Fred Korematsus decision be upheld and the court said . Yes. I want to read a little bit of just a few go blacks decision. First of all, you note in your book that it started off with the reigning, decrying of racism so how did it switch philosophically . Well it switched because like many people, Supreme Court justices included, you can believe in one thing and the exact opposite at the same time to make an argument. Justice black did say racism is wrong. Korematsu was not convicted because of hostility to him or his race. He was not excluded because of hostility to him or his race, he was excluded because we are at war with the japanese empire. Military authorities, decided that the urgency of the situation demanded that all citizens of japanese and ancestry be separated. Congress, and our military leaders as it inevitably must determined that they must have the power to do justice. So what is notable about that . Whats notable about that is that there are several aspects to that that are very questionable. First is that the judiciary has no real role in reviewing president ial or executive decisions during wartime. And thats flatly wrong the judiciary in fact has done that in the past even during the civil war where the judiciary was president lincoln did not spend heaviest corpus and could not in turn people indefinitely or sentenced them to death without a trial in the civilian court. So that aspect of it is wrong. Secondly when as both you and i quoted, justice black is saying that fred was korematsu not convicted because of hostility to him or his race was flatly wrong and thats what the senators pointed out, particularly Justice Murphy that pointed out this whole thing was based on a racial assumption and as high a quota general dewitt earlier as saying, there is no such thing as a loyal japanese. No such thing. The military had argued that the reason for the internment was that they didnt have time to sort out the loyal from the disloyal or as general dewitt put it, the quotes from the sheet. He said it was impossible to do this and they accepted that. So here is a bit from Justice Jacksons dissent, one of three dissenting in the case. Guilt is personable and not inheritable. Even if all of ones antecedents have been convicted of treason, the constitution forbids its penalties to be visited upon him. But here is an attempt to make an otherwise innocent act a crime merely because the prisoner is a set of parents as to whom he had no choice and belongs to a race from which there is no way to resign. If congress in peace time legislation should enact such a criminal law, i should suppose this court would refuse to enforce it. I think thats a powerful statement. I think that the dissents in this case, like the dissonance in many cases for example, the sense of justice home was, i knew last program those dissents were now the accepted version of what the constitution means and the majority opinions have gone down. The only problem is in freds case that that decision still remains on the book because the president , the Supreme Court, has never visited the case or said flatly we were wrong. Thats why these no lessons need to be learned. The case was decided in december, 1944. When did the camps close . They closed at various times so by 1945, most are all closed and people actually left at different stages. So, the thing is, the evidence was already there even the day one that everyone started going in to these concentration camps. But there was no military necessity. These were not dangerous people. So, you know, at some point the government was saying, what are we going to do with 120,000 people when they are all going to leave the camps . So the Community Leaders, they got Community Leaders to go in and help people get jobs. You could go east before the end of the war but you couldnt go west and thats what my father did, which was surprising to me to learn since he already had a federal conviction. So lets take some more calls. Gladys in pittsburgh, you are on the air. Hi, gladys. Good evening, i just wanted to ask the gentleman will and i think its completely races to the japanese. What germans were not we tell you and were not interned, only the japanese were bombed for and thats because of the color of their skin. Thank you. Well we certainly did bomb germany and surrey not using the atomic bomb but we did bomb germany to that point. It was clearly racist and actually, you know, that lesson is relevant today. I mean the one korematsu versus United States, my fathers case, was about racial prejudice, clearly. And those lessons, you know, need to be learned and thats what brings the development see to it especially like the situation after 9 11. My father was one of the very first people to speak up along with the japanese american citizens when they talked about rounding up every Muslim Americans and put them again into american concentration camps. She asks if fdrs Court Packing has gone through, do you think wouldve korematsu been decided differently . Roosevelt packing did go through because the conservative justices that he wanted to replace actually let the court, they died or retired and so he replaced them with his own choices. So in a sense, what we are indicting here and i think it really is an indictment of the court is the assumption that if these are good illiberal, civil liberty, civil rights supporters, how could they do Something Like this . And i think there are two points to consider here. One, as i pointed out earlier, is that there were motivated largely by patriotism, that it was not their function to tell the president during time of war that he couldnt take these kinds of steps. And secondly, that they were misled. They were like to by the government, the Supreme Court was lie to during these cases, particularly and freds case and that was the impetus for during the 19 eighties reopening freds case, bringing it back to the federal court so that he can have the trial that he never had in the first place. So the dj on twitter asks, hard to believe that one of the greatest Supreme Court justices of all times, hugo black, offered the majority opinion in korematsu. Well there are a number of reasons why it would sound surprising because they are supportive civil liberty and racial equality. In this case we had a personal collection. She was a good friend and in fact it for a time with general dewitt. He was also a veteran in world war i, intensely patriotic about that. And so in a sense he was blinded by dual loyalties. His loyalty to the president that would put him to the court, his loyalty to the military and general dewitt in particular so that when the arguments were made that freds conviction violated the constitution, in a sense he changed gears, that is he stopped being the person that he usually was. This is true of other people on the court as well. But in blacks case it was really a sad thing because he could have and the initial vote on for its case in the court whats five to four, Justice Douglas switched his vote at the last minute. So if they had stay true to the principles and not been swayed by these wartime pressures, we probably would not be here, his conviction wouldve been vacated and the interment wouldve been seen for what it was which was a purely racist act of power. David is in brentwood, tennessee. Hi, david. Hello. Thanks for taking my call. Ive never really liked but looking forward, i wondered in the alike event of Nuclear Bombs go off, what do you think, in your expert opinion, is a likelihood would be it would be around us of muslims or religious class . Thank you. Well this is actually propose after 9 11. There were thousands of arabs and Muslim Americans rounded up, some of them detained for lengthy periods of time. There is a lot that is going on challenging that. The idea that it could not happen again, its sort of wishful thinking. I would like to believe that we learn from our mistakes. And it is encouraging to think that todays generation, particularly young people, have more of an appreciation for the rights they enjoy as americans. But there are enormous pressures, particularly during times of war, as one of the judges pointed out, the judge who vacated his conviction in 1983 pointed out that during crisis, we have to be especially vigilant to protect our rights. I want to show another piece of video. His conviction had been upheld by the Supreme Court. He traveled to the midwest of the United States. This piece of video is from 1998, january 15th aking place at the white house. In the long search for justice, some names of ordinary citizens stand for millions of souls. Plessy. Brown. Parks. For that distinguished list, today we add the name of Fred Korematsu. applause karen, what was the past from the supreme path from the Supreme Court to the president of the United States 40 years later giving him the medal of freedom . How did that proceed . Tell us the story . He was able to leave the topaz concentration camp to pursue a job opportunity. He was found in new york, someone brought to him. First he actually went to Salt Lake City and he almost died there of the pneumonia. And then went on to detroit, michigan because his youngest brother was there and so thats when he met and married my mother. They could not get married in south carolina, where she was from. They got married in detroit. Because the laws were against interracial marriage . Yes. About the legal side of the case . How did that pursue and you had a role in that, so what happened . This is one of the great experiences you never anticipate. Back in 1981, i decided to write a book about these cases sort of an Academic Book really. You have a copy of it, its called justice of war and the course of the research of the book, because i learned about these cases in law school, in my constitutional law class and we read them and everybody agreed these were terrible cases, terrible decisions. My question was how could this happen with all of these liberal justices to make such a terrible mistake . I started researching it. On the course of the research i came up with documents. In the governments own file, it showed that during the prosecution of these cases, before the Supreme Court, lawyers had warned the solicitor general the United States Charles Fahey that the evidence he was playing to present, that there was in fact evidence of espionage, that it was absolutely false. The fbi had investigated and found no evidence to supported. They had all agreed there was no evidence to support this. And he asked the solicitor general, in fact almost demanded, he said it is highly unfair to this racial minority that these lies put out in a pit official publication go on corrected. The solicitor general in 1944 stood up before the Supreme Court and said he stood behind every word, every line and every syllable of the militarys report claiming that there had been acts of espionage and sabotage. Walk us through the gates quickly here because our time is running out. Very quickly found these documents, me and other researchers, and put together legal teams in San Francisco, portland and seattle where the three cases started and filed suits in federal court under a provision called quorum novice, which means that you can go back to court even after you serve your sentence. If you have evidence that the government has committed these conduct, we want back to court and in all three of those cases the judges agreed that the government had lied to the Supreme Court and so they vacated them. And the decision in Fred Korematsus case was a very powerful symbol of the fact that we can correct our mistakes. Now staying with the story, also there was a commission created to look into the whole interment process and that commission decided to do what . The well they wanted to. This was during the reagan ministration. So yes they were interested in the redress of Reparations Movement started just before my fathers case was reopened. Through the war relocation authority, they were reviewing how the japaneseamericans were treated during the incarceration. And so when people in my community got wind that my father is going to reopen his case, there are people that were not in favor of that. They thought that if my father lost, korematsu vs. United states, that would hurt their chances. But my father, as he has done before, said he wanted to go on with this. People took risks. The legal team took a risk. Of losing korematsu versus United States all over again. But my father was determined to go along with this. Ultimately the Commission Found that the japanese who were interned were do reparations so how much money did people get and how is that done . As many things are compromised, there was an official apology issued by president reagan who initially opposed redress and reparation. But its very interesting because his mind was changed by some very conservative members of congress including the leading republicans who said this is something that is important and needs to be done. And Congress Also voted that each surviving in tierney, about 60,000 out of the 120,000 who had been in the cap will get a check for 20,000 dollars. Now some people may say, well, you know, thats the government giving money away. We didnt do it. It was done years and years ago, why should we pay them reparations for this . And i always ask people when they bring this up, if you were put in a concentration camp without charges living in a desert for three years, how much would you do that for . How much money would it take to make you do that . Nobody would ever do that for 20,000 dollars. All right. The money wasnt the important issue, it was the apology. Because all these japanese americans, you know, here they had done what the government wanted them to do, to prove that they were good americans and they carry that weight on their shoulders of shame, all those years. So that was more important than money. Sometimes you didnt get money unless you talked about money. Your father continued advocacy at towards the end of his life. Filed for cases and the Fred Korematsu its two was formed. What you do there . Well we do civil and human rights education starting from kindergarten all the way through 12th grade. We have teaching kids that we provide for teachers for free so that they can go online that korematsu its too. Org well, we have lessons planned and we are also working on Fred Korematsu day, the state of california thanks to senator warren and marty block issued a legislative bill that governor schwarzenegger signed in 2010 establishing Fred Korematsu day for the state of california on my fathers birthday of january 30th. So you do get involved in and legal advocacy still . I do, more on a personal side especially on the issues of civil rights when im asked to support one in briefs, certainly i do that as well. So we have about ten minutes left and weve weave this through all the way about the implications for today, but lets finish on that note. I want to play a clip from Justice Breyer and he is talking about what the reasoning in korematsu and compares it to guantanamo, guantanamo being in the news is very weak as we do this program. Lets listen to Justice Breyer. They thought that well we cant get involved in this. If the military is trying to protect us from evasion. Now we run the war or roosevelt runs it. And we cant run it. So we have to let roosevelt do what he wants. Now to go back to your guantanamo question, what i think is the very, very difficult and very important question in this area is is there a middle left . Is there a role for the court to protect face sick individual human rights guaranteed in the constitution, in time of war, without turning the constitution into a suicide pact . Because it is not a suicide pact. And the president and the congress have to have, and they do have in that document, adequate power to protect the country. So when these two things conflict, does the court just get out of the way and say no, it is some elses job, or does the court make some effort to reconcile these two competing and opposite necessities . In guantanamo, they tried the latter. I want people to understand what it is the court did. I say there, which i firmly believe, it wont be for many years before people know whether the court was right or wrong. What did the court do . They decided in favor of the guantanamo prisoners. Korematsu reminds us of racialbased law, and the other is on detention war powers. I want to put a few citations on of the korematsu case on the screen and they are both counts. First of all, harper versus the board of elections which is a 1966 case based on race. Loving versus virginia, which is on interracial marriage. 1967 also the racial legal legacy. And university of california regions versus boxy in 1978, also on affirmative action policy in school. But then we got another one which i cited which is hamdi versus rumsfeld in 2004. If we look at this case and how it has woven its way through the fabric of americas jurisprudence, what should we learn . Well i think what we learned is that decisions that were made many years ago were under conditions that are very different than they are now. What Justice Breyer pointed out and i think quite rightly is that we cannot classify citizens anymore or any person for that matter simply on the basis of ethnicity. That is forbidden by the constitution. The due process clause and equal protection clause. What we can do is individualize and targeted protection of the country against specific threats and dangers. For example, if there is a credible threat that a particular person or even a member of a particular group is planning or about to carry out tonight states and this of course is very much in the news now with airplane bombings, the government has the power to detain that person for a reasonable period and if they have evidence that they have committed a crime, a federal crime, they can bring them into court and they will have a lawyer, they will have a hearing, they can testify on their own defense. It is the governments burden to show that this person is a danger. That did not happen in the internment cases. There was a blanket assumption that simply being japanese american, whether you were born in this country or born abroad, that you were by implication disloyal to the country. And that is the principle that Justice Breyer said quite rightly conflicts with the idea that guilt is individual in our society. And a couple of times you referenced Justice Scalia he. Spoke at the university of hawaii in 2014. Justice scalia never allows cameras to come into his speeches but we do have his words on screen to show you what he said. You are kidding yourself if you think the same thing will not happen again in times of war, the laws fall silent. Thats what was going on, the panic about the war and the invasion of the pacific and whatnot thats what happens he was wrong but i would not be surprised to see it happen again in time of war. Its no justification, but it is the reality. What is your reaction to that, karen . Unfortunately what korematsu forces United States of 1944 is more relevant today than really than it was then. And, you know, clearly the lessons in many cases had not been learned. We keep one repeating these mistakes and for Justice Scalia to make that quote now, you know, during this time is very scary and thats why its so important that we teach these lessons of history so we dont keep making the mistakes because, you know, we shouldnt live for the Supreme Court and rule should not be in times of war when a law five silent. The constitution is an important document that my father learned about and felt that it applied to him for all americans, so theres nothing wrong with the constitution as some people try to change it or pieces of it, its just some of the people that take it and try to interpret with their own use. Another lesson about the court is that people, like Fred Korematsu and other cases to it, what you want to say about that . Thats one of the great things about our system is that you can take your case to the highest court but that doesnt mean the court is either going to hear the case because the only hear about 1 of the cases that are brought up or review to them. Or that they are going to rule in your favor. So getting to the Supreme Court is only really the first step. The most important step is how the Court Decides the case and what the lasting consequences of that are going to be. I dont think Justice Scalia was endorsing the interment or the korematsu decision, in fact, he was deploying it what he was saying and its quite true is that we are kidding ourselves if we think this can happen again or that the courts are going to step in and say, no you cant do it because the court in the end is swayed by factors other than the text of the constitution. They are suede by public pressure, they are suede by patriotism, they are suede by personal loyalty to president s who appointed them, to judicial philosophies and all those things come together in a crucible of intense disagreement and will debate over what are we going to do . This is society to protect ourselves and also to protect our citizens . So as you heard, our next weeks case will be won which the courts stood up to a president , harry truman, during the korean war when he tried to use executive powers to seize the steel mills. If you are interested in these cases, i just want to tell you about this book that was put together that has synopsis of each one of the cases, tells you a little bit about the background as we have done at the table here tonight, what happened during the case, some excerpts from the decisions and what their legacy has been. You can find it on our website, cspan. Org slash lamar cases and find out how you can get it to your house health for the rest of us years. We are just at the halfway point. Special thanks to the National Constitution center for their help in putting together this landmark cases series and on this weeks program, thanks to Karen Korematsu and peter irons for being here to tell us the story of korematsu forces unite states. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Thursday night on American History tv, our series landmark cases produced in cooperation with the National Constitution center, we explore the issues, people and places involved in some of the most significant Supreme Court cases in our nations history. At eight eastern we begin with youngstown sheet and to Company Versus soy or from 1952 holding that the president did not have the authority to seize private steel mills even during wartime. And then at 9 30 eastern, the 1954 case brown v. Board of education of Topeka Holding segregated schooling violate the protection clause of the 14th amendment because segregated schools could never be equal. Watch landmark cases thursday on cspan three and anytime at cspan. Org. For the u. S. House and Senate Return on monday to resume legislative business following their state work period over the 4th of july holiday the u. S. House considers a 2021 National Defense authorization act with whats expected as early as 11 30 am eastern. The senate convenes at 3 pm. They resume debate on the nomination to be director of the office of management and budget. He has been serving in an acting capacity since january 2019. The senate limited debate and advanced his nomination on july 2nd on a Party Line Vote of 40 7 44. At 5 30 pm, the senate votes on confirmation of the vote nomination. Watch live coverage of the house when they return on cspan. Live coverage of the senate on cspan to. The president s from public affairs. Available now in paperback and ebook. Presents biographies of every president organized by the ranking by noted historians from best to worst. And features perspectives into the lives of our nations chief executives and leadership styles visit our website, cspan. Org slash the president s to learn more about each president and historian feature. An order your copy today wherever books and ebooks are sold. Well up next on American History tv, Andrea Warren talks about her book enemy child the story of norman mega, the boy who prison in the japanese american internment camps during world war ii. Mr. Mineta joins the discussion to shares experience before, during and after the Location Center located in wyoming. The library of congress is the host of this event