A Senate Judiciary Committee hearing took a strange turn when Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) used one of the most infamous Supreme Court rulings in U.S. history to make a case for absolute obedience to judicial orders. While questioning solicitor general nominee Dean John Sauer, Durbin pointed to Korematsu v. U.S., the 1944 decision that upheld the internment of Japanese Americans, as proof that court rulings must always be followed.
“As bad as it was, that court order was followed for years, was it not?” Durbin asked, seemingly suggesting that compliance with a flawed ruling was the right course of action. Sauer responded that the case had been widely repudiated and that it was difficult to argue that blindly enforcing it had been beneficial. He also referenced Dred Scott, the Supreme Court decision that ruled Black Americans could not be citizens, as another example of a ruling that should never have been obeyed.
Funny how Dems are trying to pin Republican judicial noms for rightly saying they won't blindly follow egregious court orders without question
Hawley won't defend the Korematsu, Plessy, or Dred Scott decisions
And any other judge of good conscience wouldn't either pic.twitter.com/eEQurfYDV9
— Bernadette Breslin (@bernbreslin_) February 27, 2025
The debate started when Durbin questioned Trump nominees on whether government officials could ignore court orders in certain situations. Sauer, along with assistant attorney general nominee Aaron Reitz, emphasized that while officials generally must follow the law, not all rulings are morally or legally justifiable. Reitz explained that some decisions have historically been so egregious that ignoring them may have been the better choice.
Senator @HawleyMO calls out Democrat Sen. Dick Durbin for defending the Supreme Court’s Korematsu decision upholding Japanese internment camps:
“I thought it sounded to me like my friend, Senator Durbin, was defending the Korematsu decision — which I think is one of the worst… pic.twitter.com/WfotWzhjQf
— Conservative War Machine (@WarMachineRR) February 26, 2025
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) strongly criticized Durbin’s stance, stating that following morally abhorrent rulings without question has led to some of the worst injustices in American history. “When we have a decision that is absolutely morally abhorrent—Korematsu, Dred Scott, we can go down the line—should officials who disagree with a morally abhorrent decision just blindly follow it, or do they register their disagreements?” Hawley asked.
No amount of damage control from Sen. @ChrisCoons absolves @SenatorDurbin of the insane assertions he made on defending decisions like those in Korematsu or Dred Scott. 9/x
— RNLA ⚖️ (@TheRepLawyer) February 26, 2025
The argument over judicial authority has been growing as conservatives push back against what they see as activist judges blocking Trump’s policies. Vice President J.D. Vance has been vocal in questioning the increasing power of the judiciary over the executive branch.
Groks take: The Korematsu v. United States decision is widely considered indefensible for several reasons, rooted in both legal and moral failures:
Violation of Civil Liberties: The ruling upheld the forced relocation and internment of over 120,000 Japanese Americans—most of whom…— ReplaceLoisFrankel2026 (@rafael_pin49857) February 27, 2025
Korematsu was denounced by the Supreme Court in 2018, with Chief Justice John Roberts calling it “gravely wrong.” Despite this, Democrats now appear willing to use it as a justification for rigid adherence to court rulings, regardless of their consequences.
