Civil Rights Discussion Questions How did Fred Korematsu struggle to reconcile his identity as an American with his Japanese ancestry? How (if at all) have our perspectives on ethnic pluralism and national identity changed since the 1940s? Why did Fred Korematsu's fellow Japanese Americans depicted in the film generally fail to support him in his resistance to relocation and internment during World War II? What role did the media of the times play in inciting anti-Japanese prejudices? What motives do the film (and other sources) ascribe to the media’s anti-Japanese tone? How important, do you think, were such factors as racial discrimination, the economic interests of 'American' agricultural workers, the newspapers’ desires to sell papers, etc.? Most of the Japanese Americans relocated to camps during WWII were United States citizens. Should these citizens' rights have been better protected? Should/could U.S. citizens (like Fred Korematsu) have been excluded from the military’s orders? Would it have been feasible to identify and separate "loyal" from "disloyal" Japanese Americans? Korematsu v. United States (1944) was decided by a divided U.S. Supreme Court. Six Justices joined the majority opinion, while three Justices offered dissenting opinions. Was the general public as divided as the Justices over the relocation of Japanese Americans? What does the film suggest? What do we know from other sources? Among the six Supreme Court Justices voting in the majority in Korematsu were Justices Hugo Black (who wrote the opinion of the Court) and William O. Douglas, two of the most stalwart civil libertarians ever to serve on the Supreme Court. What could account for their votes for the government in this case? What kind of political pressures might the Court, or individual Justices, have felt during this period? What do biographies of these Justices suggest? Test cases often pose great personal challenges and burdens for the plaintiffs. What does the film suggest regarding the impact of the court cases on Fred Korematsu and his family? When the Japanese American cases were re-opened in 1983, the lawyers for Korematsu (and the other two petitioners) considered a variety of legal strategies to gain redress. Why did they choose to file a petition for the reversal of Korematsu's conviction in federal district court rather than directly with the U.S. Supreme Court? What do these choices say about the political dimensions of litigation? What does the film suggest about the role of interest groups, such as the Japanese American Citizens League and the American Civil Liberties Union, in litigation and in American politics?  At the conclusion of the film when President Clinton awards Fred Korematsu the Presidential Medal of Freedom, Clinton compares Korematsu with such past civil rights heroes as Plessy, Brown, and Rosa Parks. Do you think that the comparison is an appropriate one? Why (not)? If, in 1983, Korematsu had won a reversal of his conviction and an admission of error from the U.S. Supreme Court, would that have been more significant than his victory at the federal district court level? Why? What difference would it have made for civil rights and liberties jurisprudence? In which other wars has the U.S. Supreme Court curtailed civil liberties? How? For which group(s) of Americans? Drawing upon past Supreme Court cases, what examples can you cite from World War I, the Korean War, and/or the War in Vietnam? Home | Perspective | Discussion Questions Web Resources | Books | Purchase the Film