Opinion: Utah once said ‘Never Again.' Do we mean it?
In a climate of fear and suspicion following the Japanese attacks on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066 on Feb. 19, 1942, authorizing the War Department to create 'military zones.' Those military zones would be overseen by the secretary of war, given broad powers to decide the 'right of any person to enter, remain in, or leave' those zones. In March 1942, Congress passed a law codifying the executive order and in May, people of Japanese descent were rounded up and shipped to internment camps.
Tens of thousands of West Coast residents were given almost no warning to ready themselves to be shipped off to points unknown. Many of them lost everything — their homes, their farms, their businesses, their bank accounts and almost all of their worldly possessions. Of the more than 120,000 people of Japanese descent sent to internment camps, about two-thirds were citizens of the United States. Some had been in the U.S. for multiple generations.
West of Delta, Utah, lies a testament to a time when Americans were driven by fear and racial prejudice. The Topaz Internment Camp Site housed over 11,000 people in the three years of its existence. While people were detained there, it was the fifth-largest city in Utah. The first 8,000 detainees arrived at Topaz in September 1942 and came from the Tanforan Racetrack in San Bruno, California, where they had already been detained in converted horse stalls for six months.
Initially, Utah's governor at the time, Herbert B. Maw, was opposed to the internment camp, but eventually allowed it because the state needed workers for sugar beet farms, according to the 'I Love Utah History' government website.
One of the residents of the Topaz Internment Camp was Fred Korematsu. Korematsu had been living in California when Executive Order 9066 was issued and refused to relocate. He was jailed and convicted of violating the order. He appealed and his case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court that ruled 6-3 in 1944 that the exclusion order was lawful. In 1983, a U.S. district court judge in California overturned his conviction after learning the federal government had suppressed information showing Japanese Americans, in fact, had not posed a threat.
Rep. Celeste Maloy has introduced legislation that would posthumously award Korematsu with the Congressional Gold Medal. He died in 2005.
In 1980, a bipartisan federal commission was directed by Congress to review the facts and circumstances around Executive Order 9066 and its impacts on American citizens and permanent legal residents. In December 1982, the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians released a unanimous 467-page report on that dark period in our country's history. The report became a book titled 'Personal Justice Denied,' and found 'the broad historical causes which shaped these decisions were race prejudice, war hysteria and failure of political leadership.'
In 2022, to mark the 80th anniversary of the opening of the Topaz Internment Camp, the Utah Capitol featured an exhibit of artwork, photographs, artifacts and stories from the years of the camp. The 'Topaz Stories' exhibit was supported by Friends of Topaz and the Topaz Museum, plus numerous state entities, including the Utah Department of Cultural & Community Engagement, the Utah Division of Arts & Museums, the Capitol Preservation Board, the Governor's Office, and the Utah House and Senate.
At the reception kicking off the months-long exhibit, Utah Senate President Stuart Adams commented on the diversity of the crowd, praising Utahns for their tolerance and respect for all peoples. 'We do more together in Utah than we ever do apart,' Adams said.
Ruth Sasaki, the editor of 'Topaz Stories,' said the survivors' remembrances are more important than ever, given contemporary incidents of injustice and violence against minorities. 'It can happen again. I think they are happening again,' she said in 2022.
Indeed. Today, the current administration is talking about massive detention centers to hold migrants, and potentially their families, prior to deportation. This proposed move has some clear differences with Topaz, which housed U.S. citizens of Japanese decent. The Trump administration proposal would be to have detention centers for those in the country illegally. Yet such centers certainly bring echoes of that time. Today's efforts come after attempts to end birthright citizenship, to strip legal status from over a million immigrants who are (were) documented from Venezuela and Haiti, instructing ICE to deport unaccompanied migrant children, and removing the acting ICE director because deportations aren't happening fast enough.
This weekend, The New York Times reported that the Trump administration is ramping up plans to use U.S. military bases as detention centers, beginning with Fort Bliss in Texas. The Fort Bliss site could eventually hold up to 10,000 people who are in the U.S. without appropriate documentation, and would serve as a model to develop more detention center sites across the U.S. One potential site is Hill Air Force Base in northern Utah.
Gil Kerlikowske, the former commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, said military facilities are not designed for a project like this. 'It's beyond odd,' Kerlikowske said.
When asked about the possibility of Hill Air Force Base being used for a detention center, Sen. John Curtis said, 'Hill Air Force Base is a cornerstone of our national defense, playing a vital role in sustaining the readiness of our Armed Forces and strengthening our strategic deterrence capabilities. Its mission is critical, and we must ensure nothing detracts from its core responsibilities.'
Gov. Spencer Cox recently reaffirmed his support for the Utah Compact and has also said he will support President Donald Trump's deportation plans for immigrants living in the country illegally that have committed crimes and who pose a threat to public safety. His office also told the Deseret News that the governor is in touch with Hill AFB leadership and they have not received any direction or requests from the federal government at this point.
As the mother of a U.S. citizen born in Guatemala who now feels that she must carry papers with her to prove her legal status, I hope that Utah never again becomes a place where we round people up and detain them in 'camps' for unspecified periods of time.
We need more than hope. We need action. We need to let our elected officials know how we feel. We need to advocate for humane and compassionate immigration policies. We need to speak up and speak out, especially when other voices are being silenced. We can support organizations working to protect immigrant rights and promote public awareness through education and historical context. We can share stories like those of the Japanese internment to highlight the dangers of racial prejudice and fear-driven policies. And we can love our neighbors — all of our neighbors. Even the ones who don't look like us.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
33 minutes ago
- CBS News
Sen. Lisa Murkowski on navigating Washington under Trump, her place in the GOP, and her new memoir
For Senator Lisa Murkowski, Alaska, the last frontier, is her favorite frontier. The third generation Alaskan is as familiar in the halls of Congress as she is on an Alaska Airlines flight (where even the flight attendants call her "Lisa") as she flies home nearly every weekend to America's northernmost state. Each day is packed with constituent meetings. The state's senior senator says it's what keeps her connected to the needs of Alaskans, from the high cost of living and childcare, to the shortage of housing. She writes about being a moderate in a polarized Washington in her new memoir out this week: "Far from Home: An Alaskan Senator Faces the Extreme Climate of Washington, D.C." The book jacket shows Murkowski bundled in a parka (lined with wolverine, beaver and fox) on the steps of the Capitol building. "I had brought my parka back to Washington, D.C. for the inauguration, because we knew it was going to be cold – We're gonna take a picture in the snow, wearing the parka with the Capitol," she said. Forum Books After a career as a lawyer and state legislator, Murkowski came to Washington in 2002 when her father appointed her to fill his Senate seat after he was elected Alaska's governor. She faced charges of nepotism, which Murkowski calls "accurate." She was ultimately elected to a full-term. Each election has been a challenge, but none as difficult as in 2010, when she was primaried by the Tea Party … and lost. Then, she made the difficult decision: run a write-in campaign, with a challenging last name. "Nine letters," she said, "and it had to be spelt right. Because we weren't sure how the courts were going to interpret it, if it was 'Murkowsky' with a y at the end instead of an i, was that going to be sufficient to count?" She won, giving Murkowski what she calls "a new freedom." She said that winning independently of a party's backing reminded her of the idea that she had the support of her constituents to do what she thinks is morally right. "It absolutely reinforced that," Murkowski replied. "It's a daily reminder of how I was returned to the United States Senate. It was not through the help or the assistance of the Republican Party; it was through the hope and the assistance and the persistence of Alaskans all across the board." Asked about her allegiance to the Republican Party today, Murkowski said, "I still have the same Republican values that I have long held. But my allegiance is not to the Republican Party. It's not to a party. It is to the people who returned me. And those people were Republicans and Democrats and independents and nonpartisans. So, when people back here in Washington talk about 'I need to answer to the base,' my base is so beautiful and diverse and eclectic and genuine." Murkowski never voted for Donald Trump. In February, following a flurry of executive orders from the White House, Murkowski warned her Republican Senate colleagues that Congress must not cede its authority over controlling government spending to the president. "Just to put it into context and be fair, I don't think that we should cede – we, the Congressional branch – should cede ground to anybody, not to the courts, not to the executive," she said. "I think we have a role to do. We cannot, whether it is with tariffs, whether it's with spending, whether it's the role of advice-and-consent, we have a role that is prescribed Under Article I of the Constitution. We need to take that seriously. "And I fear that what we're seeing more and more is a Republican conference in both the House and the Senate that may agree with the goals of President Trump, and so, they're good with however we get there. But we need to ask ourselves: If this was President Biden or if this were to be a President Booker, how would we respond? Because I don't think we would just sit back and say, 'It's okay that you use that.'" CBS News' Norah O'Donnell with Sen. Lisa Murkowski. CBS News I asked, "You think there would be more oversight?" "I think there would," she replied. "If not oversight, at least feigned outrage. But we are basically saying, 'Whatever way you wanna get there is gonna be okay because we like the goal.'" "Is that a capitulation by the U.S. Congress?" "I think it's Congress not doing their job," Murkowski replied. Their job right now: Deciding whether or not to pass President Trump's so-called "big beautiful bill." With a lot of concern over hot-button issues like Medicaid, Senator Murkowski will likely be a deciding vote. Alaska relies more heavily on federal funding and programs than perhaps any other state in the country, so Murkowski knows the stakes for her constituents. "I realize that my job, number one, is to be effective for Alaska," she said. "I have to be aware that my effectiveness is going to be tied to relationships, right? And so, how I am able to develop relationships in an administration where it is no secret that I did not support the president, and it's also no secret that the president did not support me. He actively campaigned against me in the state. But, at the end of the day, he won, I won." READ AN EXCERPT: "Far From Home" by Lisa Murkowski For more info: Story produced by Julie Morse. Editor: Jason Schmidt.
an hour ago
Senate Intel Chair Cotton: 'We have to be prepared for Iran to retaliate'
The chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee said Sunday that the United States must "be prepared for Iran to retaliate" following Saturday night's strikes targeting three Iranian nuclear facilities. "We have troops in the region. Iran has targeted Americans around the world, Marine barracks in Beirut, in barracks in Saudi Arabia. They've targeted embassies of countries around the world," Cotton, R-Arkansas, said in an exclusive interview on ABC News' "This Week." "The threats are serious and we take them seriously. President Trump has no higher priority, as do I and the safety of the American people." Cotton echoed President Donald Trump's warning to Iran to opt for peace instead, saying that if Ayatollah Ali Khamenei "targets Americans with military force, he will see, will make last night look like child's play." Trump described Saturday night's strikes against Iran as "a spectacular military success" that had "completely and totally obliterated" Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities. In his interview with "This Week" co-anchor Jonathan Karl, Cotton said the full damage assessment was still underway, citing comments from Joint Chief of Staff Chair Gen. Dan Caine earlier Sunday. But, he added, "There's no doubt that because of the president's decisive action, we have severely damaged Iran's critical nuclear infrastructure."
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Trump's gamble on Iran: Nuclear threat ended? Or the start of 'endless war'?
It's Donald Trump's war now. The decision to bomb Iran revealed the conflict between some of the president's fundamental impulses. The highest hope of President Trump's bomb attack on Iran: A rogue nuclear program that had defied a half-dozen of his predecessors has finally been destroyed. The deepest fear: Just four years after the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan ended America's longest war, the United States is now enmeshed in another war in a volatile region, with perilous and uncertain consequences. "Our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number one state sponsor of terror," Trump said in a late-night announcement in the East Room on June 21, interrupting Americans' Saturday night plans with news that B-2 bombers had dropped the world's most powerful conventional bombs on three sites seen as crucial to Tehran's nuclear program. "Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace." That's the calculation behind "Operation Midnight Hammer," anyway − that despite its initial bluster Tehran will be forced to abandon its nuclear program. But Trump acknowledged there were other possibilities. "Remember, there are many targets left," he said, surrounded by a solemn-looking trio of advisers − Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. "If peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speech and skill." A war between Trump's fundamental impulses The White House debate whether to launch the bombers put at odds some of Trump's most fundamental impulses. One is his fervent opposition in all three of his presidential campaigns against "forever wars," including the costly and controversial conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. His "America First" agenda reflects a determination to focus less on places like Ukraine and more on challenges close to home. While most Republican congressional leaders praised the president for the bombing, some prominent in the MAGA movement did not. "This is not our fight," Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene complained on social media. "Every time America is on the verge of greatness, we get involved in another foreign war." On the other hand, Trump is also famously impatient with problems that have frustrated standard solutions. Witness, for instance, his willingness to press the limits of the law in identifying and deporting millions of undocumented immigrants. The lengthy efforts at negotiation with Iran, like much of diplomacy, seemed unlikely to reach the sort of dramatic and decisive conclusion he favors. The bombing of Iran also reflects his alliance with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who argues that Iran's nuclear program poses an existential threat to his country. For the prime minister, achieving his decades-old dream of destroying that program is the stuff of legacy. For Trump's legacy, too − a powerful message for a president who cannot run for the Oval Office again. Netanyahu struck that chord. "Congratulations, President Trump," he said in Tel Aviv. "His leadership today has created a pivot in history that can help lead the Middle East and beyond to a future of prosperity and peace." Congressional leaders notified as planes headed home For better or worse, this will be Trump's war. For one thing, he didn't seek the approval of Congress, which under the Constitution has the right to declare war though the president has broad authority to order the use of military force. The War Powers Act, passed after President Nixon's secret bombing of Cambodia during the Vietnam War, requires presidents to notify Congress and limits the length of deployments. After the U.S. bombers had left Iranian air space, the administration immediately notified congressional leaders, Hegseth told reporters at a Pentagon briefing Sunday. Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said Trump had risked dragging the United States into a long war "without consulting Congress, without a clear strategy, without regard to the consistent conclusions of the intelligence community, and without explaining to the American people what's at stake." Those will be the elements of the debate ahead, in echoes of the Iraq war. How serious was the Iranian nuclear threat? And how will voters weigh the stakes and the cost? In Istanbul, Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, accused Trump of having "deceived his own voters" by launching the strike. The U.S. administration holds "sole and full responsibility for the consequences of its actions," he said. But he didn't specify whether Iran would retaliate against U.S. forces in the region. Hours after the bunker-buster bombs were dropped, Iran launched a new round of missiles toward Israel. On Monday, the foreign minister plans to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin, an ally but one who has his own war to fight.
