It is explained in the "Additional Details" box,,

Running Head: LAW Legal rationale concerning minority and majority decisions within the cases Name: Institution: Course: Tutor: Date: Legal rationale concerning minority and majority decisions within the cases Case 1 Case review This case is regarded as the Japanese deportation and the various occurrences which were experienced may be reviewed as follows. For instance, the case involved a well-known decision by Canada’s Supreme Court whereby government order was issued to deport citizens from Canada who had Japanese descent. Federal government through the use of the War Measures Act subjected an order within the Council, in which case it required Japanese nationals together with those born within Canada to be offered a choice concerning being placed within internment camps or moving to Japan. This was aimed at doing away with mixture of racial groups within the nation because they were believed to contribute to the conflicts which were experienced. Following the war, it is clear that the order within council which authorized deportation practices was challenged upon the foundation that Japanese’s forced deportation was undesirable crime which acted against humanity. It brought out arguments that deporting individuals from their country was undesirable. The case was therefore referred to Supreme Court. A variety of decisions were brought out aimed at establishing the law validity. Within a decision which was regarded as five-to-two, the court regarded the law as valid. It was found out by three out of five judges that the involved order was completely valid. However, the remaining two judges pointed out that the prerequisite including children and women as national security threats was invalid. Within disagreement, Justice Roy Kellock and Justice Ivan Rand applied concepts regarding rights’ bill which was unwritten in form. They discovered that federal government had no substantial power to drive out individuals from the country they belonged to without appropriate hearing. The deportation order ended up facing cancellation due to the fact that it did not support humanity hence was not supported by law. Order cancellation was aimed at doing away with mistreatment acts which were experienced by individuals who were forced to shift, because their rights as individuals were highly violated. This therefore would stop similar occurrences within future periods. Legal rationale concerning minority and majority decision The legal rationale with respect to minority and majority decisions within the case concerning Japanese deportation may be expressed as follows. Within the case concerning Japanese deportation, federal government applied an act concerning war measures to call for shifting of Japanese individuals to Japan or internment camps. This aspect was supported by majority, in which case it was perceived as constitutional in form, with cabinet being sole judge concerning advisability or necessity of the various measures. Individuals could not be protected from the abusive actions taken up by government because of lack of a constitution in written form. The various aspects which were involved within minority and majority decision were aimed at facilitating realization of peaceful conditions. The experienced wars were thought to be Through following majority towards decision making, it was believed that majority would come up with correct judgment. However, the outcomes were undesirable because it brought about mistreatment of Japanese individuals who were forced to shift to Japan or internment camps. The law always seeks to meet individuals’ expectations through justice, hence it is apparent that in this case justice expectations were not met. Justice therefore ought to be applied in this case wherein mistreatment acts would be done away with. As a result of the undesirable outcomes which came up after the deportation decisions were adhered to, it is apparent that the law was perceived as undesirable hence ended up being done away with. This was realized after Justice Roy Kellock and Justice Ivan Rand applied concepts regarding rights’ bill which was unwritten in form, whereby they discovered that federal government had no substantial power to drive out individuals from the country they belonged to without appropriate hearing. Role held by written rights’ absence or presence In my own opinion, the role which was played by written rights’ absence within majority decisions is that it highly contributed to mistreatments which were experienced by Japanese individuals. It is evident that the Japanese individuals ended up being mistreated because there were no clearly stated laws which would prevent them from such experiences. This is because there was no suitable directive upon which the decisions which were taken up would be based upon. Written constitutions are usually essential because they express specific conditions which ought to be followed when judgments regarding various aspects are being made. In cases whereby majority attempt to pass undesirable judgments, the written constitutions end up restricting them from taking up such decisions because of the predetermined conditions within the constitution. This aspect lacked within the case concerning Japanese Deportation, wherein individuals were highly mistreated by being forced to shift to Japan or internment camps. Written right’s absence brought about difficulties in establishing specific rights which ought to have offered to Japanese individuals. The Judgments which were arrived at allowing individuals to be shifted without appropriate hearing were therefore attributed to written right’s absence because appropriate guidelines were not attainable. Even in cases whereby individual’s rights were violated, it is apparent that there were no appropriate directives to bring the experienced mistreatments to an end. Supreme Court justices’ acknowledgement regarding race roles within the government decisions concerning the order’s enactment Justices by Supreme Court within this case demonstrated race roles within the government decisions. This is because judgment through Supreme Court allowed for some individuals’ mistreatment through their forced shifts. The judgments which were made were based upon racial differences in that some individuals belonging to races which were perceived as unfit to occupy the land were forced to shift to other areas. Supreme Court therefore perceived racial differences as great contributors to the experienced problems within the nation. One would expect the law or Supreme Court in that matter to defend individuals’ interests, in which case mistreatment actions would be done away with. This implies that the court could have solved the issue in ways which promoted justice among individuals, such that mistreatment actions could be discouraged. Influence of the decisions by racial reasons instead of appropriate legal reasons I support the idea that attained decisions were contaminated by racial reasons instead of appropriate legal reasons. Racial reasons in this case imply that individuals were judged upon racial differences, wherein the experienced differences were utilized to seek solutions to the experienced problems. Legal reasons would have been fulfilling certain undertakings for the purpose of fulfilling the held laws. The solutions were obtained through forcing some races especially Japanese Americans to move to other areas. This undertaking was thought to ease tensions which were brought about by experienced racial conflicts or differences. This is demonstrated by the experienced actions whereby individuals who were perceived as originating from racial groups which were viewed as unfit to occupy the nation land were forced to shift to Japan or internment camps. This portrays more of racial influence towards decisions but not legal justice. Due to racial influence, individuals who were perceived as originating from minority groups or from other racial groups who were considered as having no rights to occupy the land were therefore mistreated. In a case whereby legal reasons were the key guiding principles, it is evident that individuals would have been treated with justice, wherein judgments which were taken up would discourage mistreatment actions. Actions would therefore be carried out in ways which would support respect towards individuals’ rights, wherein the experienced mistreatment actions would be eliminated. Supreme Court attempted to offer suitable solutions to the experienced conflicts through actions which discriminated some races, instead of using the law to curb the conflicts through handling of individuals who were thought to contribute to it irrespective of races. It is apparent that in any conflicts, any of the individuals may make substantial contributions to it irrespective of the races they belong to, hence solutions may effectively be obtained through applying law requirements to the contributing elements to the conflicts. This element lacked within the case regarding Japanese deportation, wherein judgments were made through holding the alien races responsible and seeking peace attainment through applying forced shift to them. This highly violated the rights they held. Civil rights defense Given the experienced wartime dilemmas concerning the governments, attempts by Supreme Court towards defending of individuals’ civil rights would not be regarded as improper attempt. This is because although individuals were exposed to situations which prompted the court to seek suitable solutions towards the experienced situations as well as seeking suitable means to evade such situations’ reoccurrence, it is apparent that exposing individuals to mistreatment simply because of their racial differences was not desirable. Civil rights defense may be expressed as practices which would facilitate handling of individuals in ways which would ensure that held rights by individuals are highly respected. This would do away with any mistreatment forms among individuals. In accordance with the court, forcing individuals perceived as Japanese Americans out of the land was a suitable solution towards the experienced conflicts. However, the act concerning forced shift exposed individuals to undesirable actions which highly violated the rights they held. The Supreme Court therefore ought to have solved the problem in ways which could not expose individuals to severe mistreatment. For example, it would have applied harsh punishments according to law to individuals who contributed to the experienced conflicts instead of exposing the general race to undesirable conditions. The experienced wartime dilemmas concerning the governments steered the realization of the decisions whereby mistreatments came up concerning individuals who were forced to shift to Japan or internment camps. According to them, shifting of individuals from other racial groups would assist in solving the problem, by minimizing war incidences. Racial differences in cases whereby there are no well specified guidelines regarding individual relationships have the capacity to steer war occurrence as well as other undesirable outcomes. This was the case which occurred within the case concerning Japanese deportation. Owing to the fact that no written down guidelines or constitution which would direct actions concerning individuals said to originate from other racial groups, this brought about the experienced mistreatments as the court attempted to come up with su...