| Oyama v. California | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 22, 1947 Decided January 19, 1948 | |
| Full case name | Fred Oyama, et al. v. California |
| Citations | 332 U.S. 633 (more) 68 S. Ct. 269; 92 L. Ed. 249; 1948 U.S. LEXIS 2773 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Judgment for the State, San Diego County Superior Court; affirmed, 173 P.2d 794 (Cal. 1946); rehearing denied, Cal. November 25, 1946; cert. granted, 330 U.S. 818 (1947). |
| Holding | |
| The application of the California Alien Land Law to a minor citizen whose Japanese father purchased land in his name violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because the burden for the minor to prove his father did not act with an intent to evade alien land ownership prohibitions discriminated against his right to own property based on the national origin of his father. California Supreme Court reversed. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Vinson, joined by Black, Frankfurter, Douglas, Murphy, Rutledge |
| Concurrence | Black, joined by Douglas |
| Concurrence | Murphy, joined by Rutledge |
| Dissent | Reed, joined by Burton |
| Dissent | Jackson |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. XIV; California Alien Land Law of 1913, 1920 | |
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Oyama v. State of California, 332 U.S. 633 (1948) was a United States Supreme Court decision that ruled that specific provisions of the 1913 and 1920 California Alien Land Laws abridged the rights and privileges guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to Fred Oyama, a U.S. citizen in whose name his father, a Japanese citizen, had purchased land. In doing so, however, the court did not overturn the California Alien Land Laws as unconstitutional.