Summary
By looking back at a personal courtroom experience on the morning of September 11, 2001, this article explores why courts must remain neutral.
The story centers on an urgent child custody hearing in Orange County. An Afghan Muslim father had taken his American-born son to Northern California without the mother’s consent. That morning, terrorist attacks were unfolding in the name of Islam. Inside the courtroom, the case brought together an Iranian attorney, an Afghan parent, and a Jewish American judge. Despite the global crisis, the court stayed completely calm and neutral. The judge focused strictly on the facts of the custody dispute and the child’s welfare, ensuring the boy was safely returned.
Hadjian contrasts this fair trial with the historic failure of Korematsu v. United States. In that World War II case, fear led the Supreme Court to approve the wrongful internment of over 110,000 Japanese Americans based on their identity rather than their actions. Hadjian warns that history risks repeating itself during current political tensions between the United States and Iran. He emphasizes that thousands of immigrant families rely on American courts to ignore modern headlines and Middle Eastern politics. Ultimately, the article argues that the legal system only works if it remains blind to nationality and judges people solely by their personal conduct.
Hadjian, Abbas. (2026, March 18). Immigrants Must Be Judged by Conduct, Not Nationality. The Daily Journal. https://www.dailyjournal.com/articles/390305-immigrants-must-be-judged-by-conduct-not-nationality.
Full text:
Immigrants Must Be Judged by Conduct Not Nationality.pdf