This HTML5 document contains 70 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
n13https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/260/199/
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n14http://cdn.loc.gov/service/ll/usrep/usrep260/usrep260199/
n7https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
n17https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/100056/yamashita-v-hinkle/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Yamashita_v._Hinkle
rdf:type
dbo:UnitOfWork dbo:Case owl:Thing wikidata:Q2334719 dbo:LegalCase dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase
rdfs:label
Yamashita v. Hinkle
rdfs:comment
Yamashita v. Hinkle, 260 U.S. 199 (1922), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court that upheld the constitutionality of the state of Washington's Alien Land Law. The law prohibited Asians from owning property. Washington's attorney general maintained that in order for Japanese people to fit in, their "marked physical characteristics" would have to be destroyed, that "the Negro, the Indian and the Chinaman" had already demonstrated assimilation was not possible for them. The U.S. Supreme Court heard the case, brought by Takuji Yamashita, and affirmed this race-based prohibition, citing its immediately prior issued decision in Takao Ozawa v. United States. Ozawa had upheld the constitutionality of barring anyone other than "free white persons" and "persons of African nativity or ...
foaf:name
Takuji Yamashita, et al. v. Hinkle, Secretary of State of the State of Washington
dcterms:subject
dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_immigration_and_naturalization_case_law dbc:United_States_equal_protection_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Taft_Court dbc:History_of_civil_rights_in_the_United_States dbc:Japanese-American_history dbc:Race_and_law_in_the_United_States dbc:History_of_immigration_to_the_United_States dbc:Asian-American_issues dbc:1922_in_United_States_case_law
dbo:wikiPageID
59033472
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
933613261
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Takao_Ozawa_v._United_States dbr:United_States_Supreme_Court dbr:Alien_land_laws dbc:United_States_immigration_and_naturalization_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Taft_Court dbc:History_of_civil_rights_in_the_United_States dbc:United_States_equal_protection_case_law dbr:Takuji_Yamashita dbr:L._Ed. dbc:Japanese-American_history dbc:History_of_immigration_to_the_United_States dbc:Race_and_law_in_the_United_States dbc:Asian-American_issues dbc:1922_in_United_States_case_law dbr:U.S._LEXIS dbr:State_of_Washington
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n13: n14:usrep260199.pdf n17:
owl:sameAs
n7:9JfTG wikidata:Q60786366
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:SCOTUS-stub dbt:Primary_sources dbt:Reflist dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Ussc
dbp:joinmajority
unanimous
dbp:parallelcitations
43
dbp:uspage
199
dbp:usvol
260
dbp:argueyear
1922
dbp:courtlistener
n17:
dbp:decidedate
0001-11-22
dbp:decideyear
1922
dbp:fullname
Takuji Yamashita, et al. v. Hinkle, Secretary of State of the State of Washington
dbp:holding
Washington's Alien Land Law is not unconstitutional.
dbp:justia
n13:
dbp:litigants
Yamashita v. Hinkle
dbp:majority
Sutherland
dbp:loc
n14:usrep260199.pdf
dbo:abstract
Yamashita v. Hinkle, 260 U.S. 199 (1922), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court that upheld the constitutionality of the state of Washington's Alien Land Law. The law prohibited Asians from owning property. Washington's attorney general maintained that in order for Japanese people to fit in, their "marked physical characteristics" would have to be destroyed, that "the Negro, the Indian and the Chinaman" had already demonstrated assimilation was not possible for them. The U.S. Supreme Court heard the case, brought by Takuji Yamashita, and affirmed this race-based prohibition, citing its immediately prior issued decision in Takao Ozawa v. United States. Ozawa had upheld the constitutionality of barring anyone other than "free white persons" and "persons of African nativity or ... descent" to naturalize, and affirmed the racial classifications of previous court decisions. Washington's Alien Land Law would not be repealed until 1966.
dbp:arguedatea
0001-10-03
dbp:arguedateb
4
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Yamashita_v._Hinkle?oldid=933613261&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
2534
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Yamashita_v._Hinkle