What did the supreme court rule in korametsu v. the united states

Affirmed the lower courts. Conviction upheld.

Majority opinion written by: Justice Black

Majority: Conviction affirmed. The Supreme Court ruled that the evacuation order violated by Korematsu was valid, and it was not necessary to address the constitutional racial discrimination issues in this case.

Concurring Opinion Written by: Justice Frankfurter

Concurrence: The constitutional issues should be addressed, but in evaluating them, it is clear that the “martial necessity arising from the danger of espionage and sabotage” warranted the military’s evacuation order. Conviction affirmed

Dissenting opinion written by: Justice Jackson

In a strongly worded dissent, Justice Robert Jackson contended: "Korematsu ... has been convicted of an act not commonly thought a crime. It consists merely of being present in the state whereof he is a citizen, near the place where he was born, and where all his life he has lived." The nation's wartime security concerns, he contended, were not adequate to strip Korematsu and the other internees of their constitutionally protected civil rights.

Justice Jackson called the exclusion order “the legalization of racism” that violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. He compared the exclusion order to the “abhorrent and despicable treatment of minority groups by the dictatorial tyrannies which this nation is now pledged to destroy.  He concluded that the exclusion order violated the Fourteenth Amendment by “fall[ing] into the ugly abyss of racism.”

keeping a cash reserve because cash flow is the the movement of money through a company and if it just sits there, it wont the movement