What would you cite to defend the US government's decision to move the Japanese inland during WWII?

Expert Answers
Ashley Kannan eNotes educator| Certified Educator

As with the previous post, I am not sure that there is anything that could be cited to defend such a move.  Being a leader that would advocate relocation and internment, the war clause of the Constitution does give the executive branch more power in making and enforcing the laws in the name of national security.  If I were able to use hindsight to support, I would cite the fact that the attack on Pearl Harbor might have necessitated greater security measures in order to ensure that a second and more lethal attack would not happen.  In the end, the only analysis that one could cite would be the premise that during war, the central authority of the state must be maintained in order to ensure a chain of command present.

pohnpei397 eNotes educator| Certified Educator

I would not be able to cite any actual factual evidence, because there is no evidence that any Japanese-Americans actually did spy for Japan.  However, I think you can make a very compelling argument that early 1942 was no time to be taking chances.

At that point in the war, the US was losing badly.  They had been surprised by the attack on Pearl Harbor.  Because of these two things, they would have been worried and they would have been unsure as to what might happen next.

From our vantage point nowadays, we can see that the Japanese-Americans had not done anything and that Japan had not intention of invading the US.  But how were the Americans to know that at the time?

Read the study guide:
Farewell To Manzanar

Access hundreds of thousands of answers with a free trial.

Start Free Trial
Ask a Question