 |
| Yamashita v. Hinkle | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 3–4, 1922 Decided November 22, 1922 | |
| Full case name | Takuji Yamashita, et al. v. Hinkle, Secretary of State of the State of Washington |
| Citations | 260 U.S. 199 ( more ) 43 S. Ct. 69; 67 L. Ed. 209, 1922 U.S. LEXIS 2358 |
| Holding | |
| Washington's Alien Land Law is not unconstitutional. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Sutherland, joined by unanimous |
Yamashita immigrated from Japan to the US state of Washington in 1893. [1] [2] Yamashita was the second son of a merchant so he was not set to inherit property. [3] In his youth, he demonstrated academic prowess as a top graduate of Yawatahama Secondary and Uwajimi Merinken. [3] He was recruited to work in Washington State by Kyuhachi Nishiii, a restaurant owner from his hometown of Yawatahama. [3] As he was leaving he wrote to his parents telling them that his departure to the US was to bring them honor and "work for the public good". [3] Upon immigration, he lived in the Tacoma Baptist Mission as he worked for Nishii waiting tables and graduated from Tacoma High in two years. [3]
This was a period of strong anti-Asian sentiment along the West Coast. [4] Japanese immigration was a topic of contention in Washington. Companies competed for lucrative trade with the Japanese. However, anti-Japanese sentiment grew as the working class became incensed about Japanese people taking jobs and being a threat to traditional US society. [3] This anti-Japanese hate escalated as unarmed Japanese hop pickers were fired on by an angry white mob in Sumner, a town just out of Seattle. [3]
The University of Washington opened a law school with an announcement from University President Frank Graves who proclaimed that the college was meant "simply to better the opportunities of the young people of the state". [5] The school accepted any qualified person capable of paying the 25 dollar annual tuition. [5] Yamashita enrolled in 1900. [1] The incoming class was diverse, consisting of three women, a black man, Yamashita, and "native sons, Germans, Irishmen". [5] The yearbook commented that class was of "very cosmopolitan character". [5] Yamashita was a successful scholar and the school noted that his contributions were "commendable". [1] He filed for naturalization papers from the Pierce County Superior Court days prior to receiving his degree since lawyers must be American citizens. [6] [7] The week after, Yamashita passed the oral bar and was described by The Seattle Times as "highly creditable". [5]
Yamashita represented himself to Washington's highest court to argue for citizenship. [1] [6] He filed a 28 page brief that stated that race based exclusion was an insult to a country that was "founded on the fundamental principles of freedom and equality". [8] He argued that denying his citizenship was going against the values of "the most enlightened and liberty-loving nation of them all". [6] Washington attorney general Wickliffe B. Stratton ridiculed his rhetoric calling it "worn out Star Spangled Banner orations". [6] [8] Stratton states that "in no classification of the human race is a native of Japan treated as belonging to any branch of the white or whitish race". [1] The judges ruled that though Yamshita was qualified to be a lawyer "intellectually and morally", he could not become a citizen and therefore could not practice law. [8]
After being barred from practicing law, he pivoted to strawberry and oyster farming but was faced with the issue of land ownership as an Asian person. [8] The Anti-Japanese League was a group of Seattle business men who had pushed the Alien Land Law through in 1921 to ban Asians from buying or owning land. [8] The president of the Anti-Japanese League reported to the paper that "They (the Japanese) constantly demonstrate their ability to best the white man at his own game in farming, fishing and business. [8] They will work harder, deprive themselves of every comfort and luxury, make beasts of burden of their women, and stick together, making a combination that America cannot defeat". [8] Yamashita protested this law by forming the Japanese Real Estate Holding Company and trying to buy land. [8] He was forced to hire lawyers to defend his case all the way up to the supreme court level where he ultimately lost Yamashita v. Hinkle. [9]
Yamashita v. Hinkle, 260 U.S. 199 (1922), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court that upheld the constitutionality of the state of Washington's Alien Land Law. [9] The law prohibited Asians from owning property. Washington's attorney general maintained that in order for Japanese people to fit in, their "marked physical characteristics" would have to be destroyed, that "the Negro, the Indian and the Chinaman" had already demonstrated assimilation was not possible for them. The U.S. Supreme Court heard the case, brought by Takuji Yamashita, and affirmed this race-based prohibition, citing its immediately prior issued decision in Takao Ozawa v. United States . Ozawa had upheld the constitutionality of barring anyone other than "free white persons" and "persons of African nativity or ... descent" to naturalize, and affirmed the racial classifications of previous court decisions.
Washington's Alien Land Law would not be repealed until 1966.
The effects of this ruling were impactful during the Japanese internment two decades later. Since Asians living in Washington could not own land, when the Japanese were interned, they all had to leave their houses and land. When they returned, much of the land they had been living on had been rented or sold to other families and minority groups. Despite becoming a successful oyster and strawberry farmer, internment took all material achievements from Yamashita. [8] He worked as a housekeeper before "dying in obscurity". [8]
However, there has been a movement coming from the University of Washington Law School to pay homage to Yamashita's impact. [6] The law school addressed the injustice and honored his contributions at their centennial. [6] His family flew from "both sides of the Pacific" to see Yamashita witness this ceremony.
Tomoyuki Yamashita was a Japanese convicted war criminal and general in the Imperial Japanese Army during World War II. Yamashita led Japanese forces during the invasion of Malaya and Battle of Singapore, his conquest of Malaya and Singapore in 70 days earned him the sobriquet "The Tiger of Malaya" and led to the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill calling the ignominious fall of Singapore to Japan the "worst disaster" and "largest capitulation" in British military history. Yamashita was assigned to defend the Philippines from the advancing Allies later in the war. Although he was unable to prevent the superior Allied forces from advancing, despite dwindling supplies and Allied guerrilla action, he was able to hold on to part of Luzon until after the formal Surrender of Japan in August 1945.
United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court which held that "a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China", automatically became a U.S. citizen at birth. This decision established an important precedent in its interpretation of the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
Lum v. Rice, 275 U.S. 78 (1927), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the exclusion on account of race of a child of Chinese ancestry from a public school did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The decision effectively approved the exclusion of any minority children from schools reserved for whites.
Takao Ozawa v. United States, 260 U.S. 178 (1922), was a US legal proceeding. The United States Supreme Court found Takao Ozawa, a Japanese American who was born in Japan but had lived in the United States for 20 years, ineligible for naturalization. In 1914, Ozawa filed for United States citizenship under the Naturalization Act of 1906. This act allowed only "free white persons" and "persons of African nativity or persons of African descent" to naturalize. Ozawa did not challenge the constitutionality of the racial restrictions. Instead, he claimed that Japanese people should be properly classified as "free white persons".
Oyama v. State of California, 332 U.S. 633 (1948) was a United States Supreme Court decision that ruled that specific provisions of the 1913 and 1920 California Alien Land Laws abridged the rights and privileges guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to Fred Oyama, a U.S. citizen in whose name his father, a Japanese citizen, had purchased land. In doing so, however, the court did not overturn the California Alien Land Laws as unconstitutional.
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, also known as the McCarran–Walter Act, codified under Title 8 of the United States Code, governs immigration to and citizenship in the United States. It came into effect on June 27, 1952. The legislation consolidated various immigration laws into a single text. Officially titled the Immigration and Nationality Act, it is often referred to as the 1952 law to distinguish it from the 1965 legislation. This law increased the quota for Europeans outside Northern and Western Europe, gave the Department of State authority to reject entries affecting native wages, eliminated 1880s bans on contract labor, set a minimum quota of one hundred visas per country, and promoted family reunification by exempting citizens' children and spouses from numerical caps.
United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, 261 U.S. 204 (1923), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States decided that Bhagat Singh Thind, an Indian Sikh man who identified himself as an Aryan, was ineligible for naturalized citizenship in the United States. In 1919, Thind filed a petition for naturalization under the Naturalization Act of 1906 which allowed only "free white persons" and "aliens of African nativity and persons of African descent" to become United States citizens by naturalization.
Ulysses Sigel Webb was an American lawyer and politician affiliated with the Republican Party. He served as the 19th Attorney General of California for the lengthy span of 37 years. He was previously the District Attorney of Plumas County from 1890 to 1902. He was the longest serving attorney general in California history.
The California Alien Land Law of 1913 prohibited "aliens ineligible for citizenship" from owning agricultural land or possessing long-term leases over it, but permitted leases lasting up to three years. It affected the Chinese, Indian, Japanese, and Korean immigrant farmers in California. Implicitly, the law was primarily directed at the Japanese. It passed 35–2 in the State Senate and 72–3 in the State Assembly and was co-written by attorney Francis J. Heney and California state attorney general Ulysses S. Webb at the behest of Governor Hiram Johnson. Japan's Consul General Kametaro Iijima and lawyer Juichi Soyeda lobbied against the law. In a letter to the United States Secretary of State, the Japanese government via the Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs called the law "essentially unfair and inconsistent... with the sentiments of amity and good neighborhood which have presided over the relations between the two countries," and noted that Japan felt it was "in disregard of the spirit of the existing treaty between Japan and the United States." The law was meant to discourage immigration from Asia, and to create an inhospitable climate for immigrants already living in California.
Asian immigration to the United States refers to immigration to the United States from part of the continent of Asia, which includes East Asia, South Asia, and Southeast Asia. Asian-origin populations have historically been in the territory that would eventually become the United States since the 16th century. The first major wave of Asian immigration occurred in the late 19th century, primarily in Hawaii and the West Coast. Asian Americans experienced exclusion, and limitations to immigration, by the United States law between 1875 and 1965, and were largely prohibited from naturalization until the 1940s. Since the elimination of Asian exclusion laws and the reform of the immigration system in the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, there has been a large increase in the number of immigrants to the United States from Asia.
Takuji Yamashita was a Japanese civil rights activist. In spite of social and legal barriers, he directly challenged three major barriers against Asians in the United States: citizenship, joining a profession, and owning land.
United States citizenship can be acquired by birthright in two situations: by virtue of the person's birth within United States territory or because one or both of their parents was a U.S. citizen at the time of the person's birth. Birthright citizenship contrasts with citizenship acquired in other ways, for example by naturalization.
Legislation seeking to direct relations between racial or ethnic groups in the United States has had several historical phases, developing from the European colonization of the Americas, the triangular slave trade, and the American Indian Wars. The 1776 Declaration of Independence included the statement that "all men are created equal", which has ultimately inspired actions and legislation against slavery and racial discrimination. Such actions have led to passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.
People from Japan began emigrating to the U.S. in significant numbers following the political, cultural, and social changes stemming from the 1868 Meiji Restoration. Japanese immigration to the Americas started with immigration to Hawaii in the first year of the Meiji era in 1868.
Takahashi v. Fish and Game Comm'n, 334 U.S. 410 (1948), was a test case brought by Japanese-American fishermen before the United States Supreme Court to challenge California state legislation aimed at preventing them from returning to fishing occupations they worked in before their mass removal and internment during World War II. The issue at hand was a restrictive law in California requiring American citizenship to get a fishing license. A 1945 amendment to the state code barred "aliens ineligible to citizenship" from obtaining fishing licenses. The Court held that this was an unreasonable restriction and was discriminatory to residents of Japanese ancestry.
Valentine Stuart McClatchy was an American newspaper owner and journalist. As publisher of The Sacramento Bee from his father's death in 1883, McClatchy co-owned the paper with his brother Charles K. McClatchy until 1923. After leaving the newspaper business, he became a leading figure in the anti-Japanese movement in California and formed key exclusionary groups to lobby for alien land laws and race-based limits on immigration and naturalization.
The Renunciation Act of 1944 was an act of the 78th Congress regarding the renunciation of United States citizenship. Prior to the law's passage, it was not possible to lose U.S. citizenship while in U.S. territory except by conviction for treason; the Renunciation Act allowed people physically present in the U.S. to renounce citizenship when the country was in a state of war by making an application to the Attorney General. The intention of the 1944 Act was to encourage Japanese American internees to renounce citizenship so that they could be deported to Japan.
Alien land laws were a series of legislative attempts to discourage Asian and other "non-desirable" immigrants from settling permanently in U.S. states and territories by limiting their ability to own land and property. Because the Naturalization Act of 1870 had extended citizenship rights only to African Americans but not other ethnic groups, these laws relied on coded language excluding "aliens ineligible for citizenship" to prohibit primarily Chinese and Japanese immigrants from becoming landowners without explicitly naming any racial group. Various alien land laws existed in over a dozen states. Like other discriminatory measures aimed at preventing minorities from establishing homes and businesses in certain areas, such as redlining and restrictive covenants, many alien land laws remained technically in effect, forgotten or ignored, for many years after enforcement of the laws fell out of practice.
Terrace v. Thompson, 263 U.S. 197 (1923), decided by U.S. Supreme Court on November 12, 1923, was a case challenging Washington Alien Land Law that is preventing aliens purchasing, using, or leasing the land. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the decision of state that Due Process and Equal Protection clause of Fourteenth Amendment and the treaty between the United States and Japan are not conflicted.
 | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |