World War II incarceration of people of Japanese descent a stain on FDR’s legacy

Considered by many as “one of the most atrocious violations of American civil rights in the 20th century

In my recent column, posted on this Horton’s Michigan Notebook substack site, I offered some excerpts from Franklin D. Roosevelt’s ‘The Four Freedoms’ speech given during his State of the Union address to Congress in January 1941 that also requested military aid to the embattled Allied forces (mainly Great Britain) in their fight against the Fascists—led by Nazi Germany—who had taken over much of Europe and Northern Africa in their war of conquest.

I felt it was a piece of history that might inform us in our current times and contentions. In spotlighting this speech, I was evoking FDR’s stature as a champion of freedom and—given his earlier New Deal programs and initiatives—of the less fortunate. A man with a legacy of moral authority.

But I was reminded that there was another chapter in Roosevelt’s administration—less admirable—where, taking stock of the situation, he took this callous, pragmatic approach rather than standing on behalf of American constitutional principles of due process and the rights that ‘all’ citizens possess regardless of their racial or ethnic ancestry.

That stain, as you can tell by the title of this column, was his signing of Executive Order 9099 in early 1942, shortly after the attack by Japanese military forces on Pearl Harbor and the United States entry into World War II. This order would soon lead to the uprooting of people of Japanese descent, including U.S. citizens, from their homes in the states bordering the Pacific coast and their incarceration in detention camps in remote areas of the West. Most of them, as a result of this forced removal, would lose their homes, businesses, and other property—a figure that totaled in the millions of dollars, not to mention incalculable misery and lost opportunities.

Reading of the history of this decision, it seems not everyone in FDR’s administration agreed with the proposed policy, including his attorney general. However, no one from what I could tell resigned in protest. A more notable opponent was his wife, Eleanor, who voiced her concern and would subsequently do what she could to alleviate the dire conditions of those imprisoned in these desolate camps as well as counter the prejudice that many Americans harbored towards this segment of the populace.

I’ve provided background of the policy and its consequences that I found on the National Archives website. It’s part of the public domain, allowing me to re-print as is.

Needless to say, this historical episode is a more potent analogy of what’s now going on in our country, and with the Presidential campaign, than ‘The Four Freedoms’ speech. I feel FDR still deserves much praise for what he did during his time in office—and Eleanor even more so—but there’s nothing praiseworthy about the treatment of these people.

There is concern among many (myself included) with the anti-immigrant rhetoric now being voiced, coupled with calls for mass deportations that might—if enacted—involve American citizens and likely ‘The Dreamers’ who have been in this country since a young age. Also of worry is that this rhetoric enhances the practice of discrimination, in general, by emboldening those who regard certain of their (our) fellow humans ‘the other’.

So, here’s the article from the National Archives:

* * *

Prior to the outbreak of World War II, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) had identified German, Italian, and Japanese aliens who were suspected of being potential enemy agents; and they were kept under surveillance. Following the attack at Pearl Harbor, government suspicion arose not only around aliens who came from enemy nations, but around all persons of Japanese descent, whether foreign born (issei) or American citizens (nisei). During congressional committee hearings, representatives of the Department of Justice raised logistical, constitutional, and ethical objections. Regardless, the task was turned over to the U.S. Army as a security matter.

The entire West Coast was deemed a military area and was divided into military zones. Executive Order 9066 authorized military commanders to exclude civilians from military areas. Although the language of the order did not specify any ethnic group, Lieutenant General John L. DeWitt of the Western Defense Command proceeded to announce curfews that included only Japanese Americans. Next, he encouraged voluntary evacuation by Japanese Americans from a limited number of areas; about seven percent of the total Japanese American population in these areas complied.

On March 29, 1942, under the authority of the executive order, DeWitt issued Public Proclamation No. 4, which began the forced evacuation and detention of Japanese-American West Coast residents on a 48-hour notice. Only a few days prior to the proclamation, on March 21, Congress had passed Public Law 503, which made violation of Executive Order 9066 a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in prison and a $5,000 fine.

Because of the perception of "public danger," all Japanese Americans within varied distances from the Pacific coast were targeted. Unless they were able to dispose of or make arrangements for care of their property within a few days, their homes, farms, businesses, and most of their private belongings were lost forever.

From the end of March to August, approximately 112,000 persons were sent to "assembly centers" – often racetracks or fairgrounds – where they waited and were tagged to indicate the location of a long-term "relocation center" that would be their home for the rest of the war. Nearly 70,000 of the evacuees were American citizens. There were no charges of disloyalty against any of these citizens, nor was there any vehicle by which they could appeal their loss of property and personal liberty.

"Relocation centers" were situated many miles inland, often in remote and desolate locales. Sites included Tule Lake and Manzanar in California; Gila River and Poston in Arizona; Jerome and Rohwer in Arkansas, Minidoka in Idaho; Topaz in Utah; Heart Mountain in Wyoming; and Granada in Colorado. (Incarceration rates were significantly lower in the territory of Hawaii, where Japanese Americans made up over one-third of the population and their labor was needed to sustain the economy. However, martial law had been declared in Hawaii immediately following the Pearl Harbor attack, and the Army issued hundreds of military orders, some applicable only to persons of Japanese ancestry.)

In the "relocation centers" (also called "internment camps"), four or five families, with their sparse collections of clothing and possessions, shared tar-papered army-style barracks. Most lived in these conditions for nearly three years or more until the end of the war. Gradually some insulation was added to the barracks and lightweight partitions were added to make them a little more comfortable and somewhat private. Life took on some familiar routines of socializing and school. However, eating in common facilities, using shared restrooms, and having limited opportunities for work interrupted other social and cultural patterns. Persons who resisted were sent to a special camp at Tule Lake, CA, where dissidents were housed.

In 1943 and 1944, the government assembled a combat unit of Japanese Americans for the European theater. It became the 442d Regimental Combat Team and gained fame as the most highly decorated of World War II. Their military record bespoke their patriotism.

As the war drew to a close, "internment camps" were slowly evacuated. While some persons of Japanese ancestry returned to their hometowns, others sought new surroundings. For example, the Japanese-American community of Tacoma, WA, had been sent to three different centers; only 30 percent returned to Tacoma after the war. Japanese Americans from Fresno had gone to Manzanar; 80 percent returned to their hometown.

The internment of Japanese Americans during World War II sparked constitutional and political debate. During this period, three Japanese-American citizens challenged the constitutionality of the forced relocation and curfew orders through legal actions: Gordon Hirabayashi, Fred Korematsu, and Mitsuye Endo. Hirabayashi and Korematsu received negative judgments; but Mitsuye Endo, after a lengthy battle through lesser courts, was determined to be "loyal" and allowed to leave the Topaz, Utah, facility.

Justice Murphy of the Supreme Court expressed the following opinion in Ex parte Mitsuye Endo:

I join in the opinion of the Court, but I am of the view that detention in Relocation Centers of persons of Japanese ancestry regardless of loyalty is not only unauthorized by Congress or the Executive but is another example of the unconstitutional resort to racism inherent in the entire evacuation program. As stated more fully in my dissenting opinion in Fred Toyosaburo Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 , 65 S.Ct. 193, racial discrimination of this nature bears no reasonable relation to military necessity and is utterly foreign to the ideals and traditions of the American people.

In 1988, Congress passed, and President Reagan signed, Public Law 100-383 – the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 – that acknowledged the injustice of "internment," apologized for it, and provided a $20,000 cash payment to each person who was incarcerated.

One of the most stunning ironies in this episode of denied civil liberties was articulated by an internee who, when told that Japanese Americans were put in those camps for their own protection, countered "If we were put there for our protection, why were the guns at the guard towers pointed inward, instead of outward?"

Steve Horton is a mid-Michigan journalist and commentator.