Between 1942 and 1946, approximately 112,000 persons of Japanese ancestry were ordered to leave their homes and were transported to internment camps where they were held under armed guard. Four cases litigated before the United States Supreme Court dealt with orders related to this policy: Hirabayishi v. United States, Yasui v. United States, Korematsu v. United States, and ex parte Endo. Property deprivation related to internment was at issue in Oyama v. California. This note discusses whether the Solicitor General of the United States violated a duty of candor in Hirabayashi and Yasui or in Korematsu. That question requires analysis of subsidiary questions relating to representation of entity clients generally, and of government clients in particular. It also provides opportunity for analysis of broader questions regarding the extent of the duty of loyalty.


Japanese internment, ethics, responsibility

Document Type




Included in

Law Commons