Question

In 1944, the supreme court upheld the authority if the u.s. government to order the internment of a minority group in the interest of national security, even though there was no evidence that any members of this group were disloyal to the united states. should the same policy be applied today against u.s. muslims or muslim immigrants? why or why not?

Answer 1

Detaining a person without due process, fair hearing and right to representation violates the fundamental principles of natural law, eternal principles of platonic justice and the unniverality of human rights. Doing this to Muslims at the pretext of national security like it happened against japanese Americans is not only unacceptable but also very wrong.

Nobody should have their rights violated as doing so violates the rights of their neighbours as well.

Answer 2

Americans should not use the same policy for US Muslims, as the internment of Japanese-American citizens during World War II was seen as a huge mistake by the federal government. This is because the government ignored the constitution and detained people without any proof of wrong doing.

Due to this government error in judgement, Ronald Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act in 1988. This law was America's formal apology to those Japanese-American citizens who were wrongly forced into internment camps. Each survivor was paid $20,000.

To ensure the US does not make this mistake again, they must only arrest and prosecute individuals whom they have evidence of wrongdoing.