Stanley Forman Reed

Name: Oyama v. California — Dissent
Author: Stanley Forman Reed

Summary

“Oyama v. California — Dissent”, is a work by Stanley Forman Reed. It explores elements such as presumption, alien and escheat.

Quotes from Oyama v. California — Dissent (Stanley Forman Reed)

Stanley Forman Reed, Oyama v. California — Dissent

“ We do not interpret the opinion of our Brethren to say that the presumption, if valid, is irrebuttable; or, to put the matter differently, that the effect of the presumption, if valid, is to make in inevitable that all gifts of real property by an alien-Japanese father to his child can be successfully escheated by the state. As the cases prove, an alien-Japanese father can give California lands to his son in spite of the presumption. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Forman Reed, Oyama v. California — Dissent

“ California does not deny the right to own land in California to a citizen son of an ineligible alien. If that citizen obtains the land in any way not made void as a violation of law he may hold it. Under § 9 the land escheats because of the father's violation of law before it reaches the son. The denial to the father by California of the privilege of land ownership is not challenged. Neither is the right to protect that denial by an escheat of the land on the father's attempt to avoid the limitations of the California land law. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Forman Reed, Oyama v. California — Dissent

“ It is of course true that the son of a citizen of Japan cannot receive a gift from an ineligible father as readily as a son of an alien entitled to naturalization but again such a classification is entirely reasonable when we once assume that the State of California has a right to prohibit the ownership of California land directly or indirectly by a Japanese.
Discrimination in the sense of placing more burdens upon some than upon others is not in itself unconstitutional. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Forman Reed, Oyama v. California — Dissent

“ All reasonable classification puts its subjects into different categories where they may have advantages or disadvantages that flow from their positions. [8] The grouping of all those who take land as grantees, in a transaction in which an ineligible alien pays the consideration, in a class subject to the statutory presumption of § 9 and other inferences which are reasonably related to the transfer, should not be struck down as unconstitutional. Unless the California Land Laws are to be held unconstitutional, we think the presumption and its resulting effects must be accepted as legal. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Forman Reed, Oyama v. California — Dissent

“ The equal-protection clause of the 14th Amendment does not take from the state the power to classify in the adoption of police laws, but admits of the exercise of a wide scope of discretion in that regard, and avoids what is done only when it is without any reasonable basis, and therefore is purely arbitrary. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Forman Reed, Oyama v. California — Dissent

“ The Japanese father and his citizen son are parties to an illegal transaction if the land was transferred with the 'intent to prevent, evade or avoid escheat'; as an English father is not prevented from holding real property, his gift cannot be challenged on that ground by the state. The capacities of the donors are different and it is this difference, and nothing else, which raises in one case and fails to raise in the other, the presumption complained of by Oyama. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Stanley Forman Reed, Oyama v. California — Dissent

“ Statutes, national and state, dealing with such methods of proof in both civil and criminal cases, abound, and the decisions upholding the are numerous. * * *
'That a legislative presumption of one fact from evidence of another may not constitute a denial of due process of law or a denial of the equal protection of the law, it is only essential that there shall be some rational connection between the fact proved and the ultimate fact presumed, and that the inference of one fact from proof of another shall not be so unreasonable as to be a purely arbitrary mandate. ”

Stanley Forman Reed

Summary

Quotes from Oyama v. California — Dissent (Stanley Forman Reed)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature