Under Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, (ii) military law is subject to the dictates of the U.S. Constitution and international treaties to which the U.S. is a signatory.  The U.S. Supreme Court recently reaffirmed this principle in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 126 S.Ct. 2749 (2006), (iii) holding that the military commissions created to try Guantanamo detainees under the President’s November 13, 2001 Order, violated the Geneva Conventions.

The Hamdan decision reaffirms that the government must obey the provisions of the Geneva Conventions, and solidifies the incorporation of other ratified treaties, including the ban on military aggression under the U.N. Charter.  The Hamdan decision vindicates Lt. Watada’s claim that he is upholding a higher law, which conflicts with his military orders to deploy and contractual obligation to serve as he is directed.  Through his dissent, Lt. Watada fulfills his oath under Article VI, to be “bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.”

We believe a staunch defense of the Constitution is in keeping with JACL Hawai`i’s primary mission of protecting the civil and human rights of all.  To this end, we have vigorously opposed all recent efforts at the local level, to amend and thereby weaken the Hawai`i Constitution’s Bill of Rights – from same-sex marriage in 1998 to the recently passed criminal constitutional amendments of 2002 and 2004.

JACL Hawai'i is mindful of the tremendous sacrifices made by our soldiers and their families.  We are also aware that our support for Lt. Watada may be mistaken as a statement against our soldiers.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  We salute those men and women of conscience who choose to remain in uniform and serve their country, and recognize that patriotism may be manifested in a variety of ways.

Our support for Lt. Watada stems from our commitment to uphold respect for the law, and expresses our profound disappointment with a government whose flagrant disregard of law, has tragically cost thousands of American and Iraqi lives.

In reaching this important and difficult decision to support Lt. Watada, we remember the lessons of the past.  For example, Executive Order 9066, issued in 1942 by then-President Franklin Roosevelt, which authorized the exclusion and subsequent internment of 120,000 Japanese Americans from the West Coast, 2,200 Japanese Latin Americans, 2,000 Japanese Americans in Hawai`i, and hundreds of German and Italian Americans.  Faced with a challenge to the constitutionality of that order, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Korematsu v. U.S., 323 U.S. 214 (1944), failed to exercise its power of judicial review and instead chose the rule of deference to the military in times of war.

Learning from the historical mistakes embodied in the Korematsu decision, the Hamdan Court reined in the executive branch and fulfilled the “duty which rests in the courts in time of war as well as time of peace, to preserve unimpaired the constitutional safeguards of civil liberty.” Hamdan, 126 S.Ct. at 2774.

By supporting Lt. Watada, JACL Hawai`i honors our legacy of preserving the lessons of the World War II internment of Japanese Americans to ensure that such mistakes are never repeated nor revisited upon any other minority, and reaffirms our principled efforts to protect the Hawai`i Constitution.  Lt. Watada takes a similar stand of principle, striving to uphold the Constitution as he was sworn to do.

For all of these reasons, JACL Hawai`i supports Lt. Watada’s decision of conscience.

(i) After considerable debate and  respectful discussion over nearly five weeks, a bare majority of Directors voted to support Lt. Watada’s actions at the organization’s July 10, 2006 Board of Directors meeting.

(ii) Article VI of the United States Constitution states,

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land . . . .          

 . . . [A]nd all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution[.]” (Emphases added.)

(iii) In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, decided June 29, 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court specifically held that,

 The UCMJ [(Uniform Code of Military Justice)] conditions the President’s use of military commissions on compliance not only with the American common law of war, but also with the rest of the UCMJ itself, insofar as applicable, and with the rules and precepts of the law of nations, including, inter alia, the four Geneva Conventions signed in 1949.  The procedures that the Government has decreed will govern Hamdan’s trial by commission violate these laws. . . .

. . . .

[I]n undertaking to try Hamdan and subject him to criminal punishment, the Executive is bound to comply with the Rule of Law that prevails in this jurisdiction.

Hamdan, 126 S.Ct. at 2786, 2798.