Did Trump v. Hawaii overrule Korematsu?

On June 26, 2018, Scott Bomboy, the editor in chief of the National Constitution Center, recapped the Trump v. Hawaii case, including its broad pronouncements by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Sotomayor. Notwithstanding those, he asks, can the Korematsu decision be overruled without a specific case about it appearing at the Court?

Key answers from the blog post follow:

"'While two dissenting Justices praised the Court for ‘finally overruling’ that 1944 precedent, the majority did not actually do so, for several reasons,' [Professor and journalist covering SCOTUS since 1958 Lyle] Denniston said. 'First, there was no request by the parties in the case to do that in this case so that was not an issue before the Justices; second, the language of an explicit overruling was not used; third, the majority said that the ruling "has been overruled by history" -- which is not the same as an actual overturning of the precedent. The majority's negative sentiments about it are what judges and lawyers call "dicta" -- statements made in a court opinion that do not affect the actual outcome.'

"Dicta, however, can be understood to be powerful statements on their own. Two examples from the Court are the famous “Footnote Four” from the Carolene Products decision (about the Court’s rationale for declaring laws unconstitutional) and statements about the Alien and Sedition Acts in New York Times v. Sullivan.

"Prior Justices haven’t been bashful about criticizing Korematsu. The late Antonin Scalia cited Justice Robert Jackson’s dissent as his favorite Supreme Court opinion of all time. Scalia said in 2014 he admired Jackson’s opinion for its writing style and for the fact that 'it was nice to know that at least somebody on the court realized that that was wrong.'

"About a year later, Justice Stephen Breyer told ABC News on Sunday he didn’t see mass internment of ethnic groups in the nation’s future, in a reference to Korematsu. 'This country has developed a stronger tradition of civil liberties,' Breyer said about Korematsu’s legacy. 'I think everyone I've ever run into thinks that case was wrongly decided.'

"Although in 1983 federal courts overturned Korematsu’s original convictions, the Supreme Court never has had an opportunity to overturn the 1944 decision in an official way. Today’s statements by Roberts and Sotomayor may be the closest the Court will ever come to doing that in the near future."