I am trying to find a source that will confirm that, during World War II, the FBI tried to get census data that would locate Japanese on the West Coast; the Census Bureau wouldn’t give it, and the FBI went all the way to the U. S. Supreme Court, which also said no to the FBI. Unfortunately I can’t find any quotable souce for this although I’ve checked the U. S.Code Annotated, including a volume for the Constitution; *Corpus Juris Secundum; The Federal Practice Digest; and U. S. Supreme Court Reports, Lawyers’ Edition. Do any Dopers have this information? Thanks very much. 
Even if it is true that the census doesn’t give out information, does anyone believe for a minute they couldn’t get it “Unofficially”?
I bet for a few hundred (maybe thousand) you could get classified info from a regular census clerk
Dougie, I don’t know about the FBI, but I did read an article by Joseph Perkins which stated the Census Bureau did indeed turn over information to the War Dept. regarding the Japanese and Japanese Americans living on the West Coast. Perkins cited a paper by Margo Anderson of the Univ. of Wisc. Milwaukee and William Seltzer of Fordham Univ. as his source. I could not find the paper available on line, but I did find some info on Anderson and Seltzer at the websites of their respective universities. Ms. Anderson has written a few books on the Census; perhaps an email to her would get you the sources you’re looking for.
From the March 27th San Diego Union-Tribune:
William Seltzer, a statistician and demographer at Fordham University, and Margo Anderson, a history professor at the University of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, wrote “After Pearl Harbor: The Proper Role of Population Data Systems in Time of War.” The authors presented the paper Saturday in Los Angeles at the Population Association of America’s annual meeting.
These days, the Census Bureau regularly publishes reports about the number of people of a given race living in an area as small as a city block. At the start of World War II, however, such information generally was not available. Seltzer and Anderson say the Census Bureau gave the War Department (now Department of Defense) detailed information about Japanese-Americans in 1941 and 1942.
Census Bureau officials believed then that such information was valuable to the War Department’s effort to round up residents of Japanese ancestry, the researchers said.
Such practices do not appear to have violated laws governing the census, which prohibit the bureau from disclosing information on individuals. But the authors said the Census Bureau appeared to be willing to provide personal data. It’s not clear whether the bureau was asked to do so.
Officials from the bureau say they fear the academic paper could cause further mistrust among people who already distrust the government. Officials said anyone who releases specific census data could end up in a federal penitentiary.
I read about the incident in Infamy by John Toland. According to him, the Census Bureau handed over the information secretly and illegally.
Work is the curse of the drinking classes. (Oscar Wilde)
“Illegally” is right!! All employees of the Census Bureau take an oath not to disclose personal information gathered during enumeration. Anyone violating this oath faces a hefty fine and incarceration in a federal penitentiary.
The fact that the U. S. Supreme Court ruled the internment of Japanese during World War II in this country illegal, should underscore that.
From the post by dougie_monty:
Hate to burst your bubble, dougie, but the USSC actually upheld the internment. In the case Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944), the USSC set the basis for later rejection of racially discriminatory practices by asserting that laws that infringed on the rights of a racial group were suspect. But the court concluded after analysis that the needs of the war were sufficient to support the action by the government. The 6 -3 ruling upheld the conviction of Toyosaburo Korematsu for violating Civilian Exclusion Order #34 by remaining in a ‘Military Area’ (San Leandro, CA).
According to Asian Week
I misunderstood the facts when I posted the above. The conviction of Fred Korematsu was overturned in the 1980s because the government withheld evidence during proceedings in the 1940s. However, Korematsu v. United States itself was not overturned. It is still valid law.
For what it’s worth, bibliophage, that is a very confusing site and the statement you originally quoted from it appears to be totally false, or at least misleading. It takes digging into the heart of the article to find out that the conviction in United States v. Korematsu was overturned at the District Court level by Judge Patel in San Francisco and not appealed by the U.S. And it happened in November of 1983, not 1984. Glad you figured it out. I’d say they need a better editor. 
To DSYoung Esq: Do you have a citation (Fed. Supplement, etc.) for this? And was there an attempt made to carry it to the Supreme Court, only to be barred by those dreaded words certiorari denied? This would be crucial, since a District Court’s ruling cannot overrule the U. S. Supreme Court.
Dougie,
Korematsu’s conviction was overturned because of prosecutorial misconduct (withholding evidence, etc). The central holding of of the Supreme Court case (i.e., that the internment of Japanese during wartime is not unconstitutional) was not touched, and as far as I know it still stands.
In other words, Korematsu’s conviction was overturned, but “Korematsu v. United States (1944)” was not. Hope that helps.
–bob92
Yes, I’m sorry, I should have been a bit more explicit; shorthand is wonderful if you assume everyone else is on the same page with you.
In the criminal case United States v. Korematsu, Toyosaburo (“Fred”) Korematsu was prosecuted for violation of 18 U.S.C. §97a and the order issued thereunder (civilian exclusion order #34). He was convicted and the District Court ordered that he be placed on probation for five years, but judgement was suspended. He appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which certified to the United States Supreme Court the question of whether the Circuit Court of Appeals had the ability to review Korematsu’s conviction in the absence of any other sentence (it was apparently contended by the Government that the decision of the District Court was not ‘final’). In Korematsu v. United States (I), 319 U.S. 432 (1943), the USSC answered this question in the affirmative.
Their question having been answered, the Circuit Court of Appeals then heard Korematsu’s appeal and affirmed the judgement of the District Court. Korematsu filed with the USSC for a writ of certiorari, which was granted. In Korematsu v. United States (II), 323 U.S. 214 (1944), the USSC affirmed the judgement of the District Court. Korematsu filed for a rehearing, noting the fact that three of the justices wrote dissenting opinions strongly critical of the decision, but that request was denied.
In 1983, Korematsu filed with the District Court of Northern California a request for writ of error coram nobis, an interesting writ of error in which the court admits to its own mistake. To obtain such a writ, one must show that there was an error of fact which the party requesting the writ could not have discovered, which if presented would have resulted in a different judgement (Parenthetically, I presume that Korematsu actually filed an action for relief under FRCP 60(b), which superseded this writ in federal courts some time ago). Korematsu alleged that the federal government had hidden from him and all other accused violators of the Exclusion Order evidence that showed there really wasn’t any serious threat of terrorist or saboteur activity by Japanese-Americans on the West Coast of the U.S. Because the holding in Korematsu (II) had hinged in large part on the government’s assertion in the original criminal case and during procedings before the USSC that there WAS such a threat, and that the Exclusion Order was vital, such a showing by Korematsu would have removed the raison d’etre behind the determination that Civilian Exclusion Order #34 was constitutional. If I recall correctly, Korematsu’s filing came after release by the government of documents showing that the threat asserted to exist by the government in 1942 was less than had been stated, and the the government knew it, but persisted in locking up (er, that is, placing in internment) Japanese-Americans anyway.
After a trial before her, Judge Marylin Hall Patel of the Disctrict Court for Northern California granted Korematsu’s request and issued the ‘writ’, finding that the determination of guilt was error by the court. The government did not appeal this determination.
To review, then: The government rounded up Japanese-Americans on the basis they represented a threat; Korematsu stayed behind illegally; Korematsu was convicted of violating the order requiring him to relocate; Korematsu appealed that conviction; the USSC upheld the conviction determining that the order was constitutional, despite also establishing as a rule of constitutional law in the US that a law which treats people differently based on their ‘race’ is inherently suspect, and should be scrutinized very strictly to make sure the law is absolutely necessary; some 40 years later, Korematsu got a determination that the holding in his case, and his conviction, were obtained by the deliberate failure of the government to turn over evidence that there was no need for the order forcing relocation.