The Supreme Court’s end-of-term decision upholding Donald Trump’s Muslim travel ban prompted a blistering dissent from Justice Sotomayor and Justice Ginsberg equating the court’s acceptance of the Muslim ban with its acquiescence in Korematsu v. United States to the World War II internment of over 120,000 adults and children of Japanese descent, about 70,000 of whom were American citizens. In response, the majority in the Muslim ban case—Trump v. Hawaii—insisted Korematsu “has nothing to do with this case.” Spurred perhaps by the attack from Justices Sotomayor and Ginsberg, the Trump majority further claimed to condemn and renounce Korematsu, an act many welcomed.

In truth, the Supreme Court’s treatment of the Muslim ban bears alarming parallels to its treatment of the Japanese internment. And an examination of Korematsu and of two other lesser-known Supreme Court cases dealing with the internment regime highlights the dangerous opening the Trump ruling creates for ever-more draconian measures driven by Trump’s open animus toward Muslims and others. Finally, given the reality of the Muslim ban ruling, the Supreme Court’s claimed disavowal of Korematsu rings hollow.

The Japanese Internment Cases