Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Farrington, Governor Of Hawaii, Et Al. v. Tokushige Et Al.

• 1926 • 273 U.S. 284 • Taft Court
The U.S. Supreme Court case Farrington, Governor of Hawaii, et al. v. Tokushige et al., 1926 revolved around the issue of private education and parental rights in choosing their children's education system. The Territory of Hawaii had enacted a law that severely restricted the operation of private schools, particularly those teaching languages other than English or subjects not approved by public school authorities - an act primarily aimed at Japanese language schools due to rising...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Taft Court
Term: 1926
Docket: 465
273 U.S. 284
47 S. Ct. 406
71 L. Ed. 646
1927 U.S. LEXIS 699
Argued: Jan 21, 1927

Farrington, Governor Of Hawaii, Et Al. v. Tokushige Et Al.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

The U.S. Supreme Court case Farrington, Governor of Hawaii, et al. v. Tokushige et al., 1926 revolved around the issue of private education and parental rights in choosing their children's education system. The Territory of Hawaii had enacted a law that severely restricted the operation of private schools, particularly those teaching languages other than English or subjects not approved by public school authorities - an act primarily aimed at Japanese language schools due to rising anti-Japanese sentiment during this period. Parents like Matsujiro Tokushige challenged this law as unconstitutional interference with their right to control their children's education. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Tokushige and others, stating that the law was indeed unconstitutional as it violated parents' fundamental rights to decide on their children’s upbringing and schooling without undue government interference under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause which protects liberty interests including individuals’ rights to establish a home and bring up children.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Farrington v. Tokushige, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., joined by Justices Louis Brandeis and Harlan Fiske Stone, argued that the law in question was a violation of parental rights. They believed that parents should have the right to control their children's education and upbringing without undue interference from the state. The justices also pointed out that there were no compelling reasons given as to why Japanese language schools posed a threat to American society or government. Furthermore, they contended that it was not within the power of Hawaii's legislature nor any other U.S body to decide what languages could be taught in private schools because this would infringe upon personal liberties protected under due process clause of Fourteenth Amendment.

Opinion written by Justice JCMcReynolds
Decided: Feb 21, 1927
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms