323 U.S. 214 (1944)
Petitioner challenged the assumptions underlying the order and claimed that when the exclusion order was enacted, all danger of Japanese invasion of the exclusion area had disappeared.
- The U.S. Supreme Court held that the exclusion order under which petitioner was convicted was valid and, thus, upheld the conviction.
- Because the order curtailed the rights of a group based on national origin, the order was inherently suspect and rigid scrutiny was applied.
- The Court found that the exclusion order, like a previously upheld curfew order, was intended to prevent espionage and sabotage in threatened areas during war.
- The exclusion from such an area was closely related to the intent of the order.
- Moreover, the Court could not reject the judgment of the military and Congress that there were disloyal members of the population who constituted a menace to the national defense and safety.
- Compulsory exclusion of groups of citizens from their homes, except under circumstances of direst emergency and peril, was inconsistent with the basic governmental institutions.
- However, the Court held that the exclusion order was justified by the exigencies of war and the threat to national security.
The Court affirmed petitioner's conviction.