Has a racially discriminatory law ever survived strict scrutiny since Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (U.S. 1944)? It seems like if any case had a chance to survive, it would have been Johnson. This is not to say that I disagree with Johnson's holding; I just think that the government's position is at least plausible and not motivated by animus.
No racially discriminatory law has survived strict scrutiny since Korematsu. Johnson illustrates this clearly: even in the prison context, where the Court *usually* defers to officials, it struck down the racial segregation policy.
Of course, as we will discuss in class tomorrow, whether a law is racially discriminatory isn’t always clear on its face. When intent is harder to pin down, the law is sometimes upheld.
Has a racially discriminatory law ever survived strict scrutiny since Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (U.S. 1944)? It seems like if any case had a chance to survive, it would have been Johnson. This is not to say that I disagree with Johnson's holding; I just think that the government's position is at least plausible and not motivated by animus.
No racially discriminatory law has survived strict scrutiny since Korematsu. Johnson illustrates this clearly: even in the prison context, where the Court *usually* defers to officials, it struck down the racial segregation policy.
Of course, as we will discuss in class tomorrow, whether a law is racially discriminatory isn’t always clear on its face. When intent is harder to pin down, the law is sometimes upheld.