Trial,US v. Townsend, et al, 1942
Dublin Core
Title
Trial, US v. Townsend, et al, 1942
Description
US v. Townsend, et al, 1942. The U.S. government charged Ralph Townsend, David Warren Ryder, Frederick Vincent Williams, Tsutomu Obana, K. Takahashi, and S. Takeuchi with violating a law regarding the registration of foreign agents and propagandists. Obana, Takahashi and Teakeuchi left the U.S. for Japan.
Kay was called as a witness since an organization that she was part of at U.C. Berkeley had invited one of the above as a speaker for an event. She travelled across the country accompanied by her mother Tomi to testify at the trial. Her testimony is not included in the court records.
What is of interest is the fact that Kay was allowed to leave the "assembly center" detention where Japanese Americans including herself were denied due process of law (wherby when one is charged with an offense, they are brought to a trial and presented with the charge against them) and sent to Washington D.C. to participate in formal legal proceedings where the basic functioning of the legal system (the writ of habeus corpus which protects people from being held in prison or detention without charge) was fully functioning for three white Americans. Some might call this ironic, but others may see this as a prime example of the way in which Japanese Americans were not able to access or exercise their full rights as citizens. The state's use of narratives about race to deny full citizenship to racial minorities was fully operative as it was in other historical contexts. Moreover, what does the U.S. Constitution say about the rights of non-citizens with regards to due process/ habeus corpus? This issue is still in contention.
Kay was called as a witness since an organization that she was part of at U.C. Berkeley had invited one of the above as a speaker for an event. She travelled across the country accompanied by her mother Tomi to testify at the trial. Her testimony is not included in the court records.
What is of interest is the fact that Kay was allowed to leave the "assembly center" detention where Japanese Americans including herself were denied due process of law (wherby when one is charged with an offense, they are brought to a trial and presented with the charge against them) and sent to Washington D.C. to participate in formal legal proceedings where the basic functioning of the legal system (the writ of habeus corpus which protects people from being held in prison or detention without charge) was fully functioning for three white Americans. Some might call this ironic, but others may see this as a prime example of the way in which Japanese Americans were not able to access or exercise their full rights as citizens. The state's use of narratives about race to deny full citizenship to racial minorities was fully operative as it was in other historical contexts. Moreover, what does the U.S. Constitution say about the rights of non-citizens with regards to due process/ habeus corpus? This issue is still in contention.
Collection Tree
- War Years
- Federal Government Files
- Trial, US v. Townsend, et al, 1942
- Federal Government Files
Comments