Just like Boris and the 12 week wait between vaccinations.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

Quarantine for an illness is typically limited to those who have been infected or are suspected to have been infected, but the Chinese government imposes it in a city of 11 million, the vast majority of the residents unexposed so far. https:/t.co/qw0za37REX

— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) January 23, 2020

The quarantine that the Chinese government has imposed on millions is impeding people with serious medical problems from obtaining the care and medicine that they need. https:t.co/vRPpCey3kw pic.twitter.com/AV8pCHlBF0

— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) January 30, 2020

Closing the barn door after the horse has run, Chinese authorities imposed a quarantine on Wuhan after five million people had already fled--many to avoid the quarantine, which was rumored. Their travel tracks the coronavirus spread. #AutocratsKnowBest https:t.co/NoQhwrwq9V

— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) February 10, 2020

How to spread the coronavirus: Place in mass quarantine detention centers anyone with a fever or who has been in contact with a coronavirus victim. Many of those people don't have the coronavirus, but many will after being detained with people who do. https:t.co/u0lV95HCaG pic.twitter.com/lBI3MUU9Pt

— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) February 18, 2020

"If free speech existed in China, global media sites such as Facebook & Twitter as well as Chinese internet platforms would be inundated with desperate calls for help and harrowing stories of deaths and illnesses posted by people living under quarantine." https:/t.co/krI8QWYx0n pic.twitter.com/boeXyvWAkW

— Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) March 13, 2020

or California's commission (AB-3121) because that might evoke judiciabl grievances brought to Congress by descendants of US slaves, subjected to federal violations of the Alien Tort Act of 1789 and 300 years of apartheid crime in the several states.

What was the question?
Did the President and Congress go beyond their war powers by implementing exclusion and restricting the rights of Americans of Japanese descent?

1944 Korematsu v. United States
6-3, "No"

1980 Commission on Wartime Relocation and Internment of Civilians, report and recommendations to the US Congress, 1983
notably, #3

remedy
1984 Korematsu v. United States, US District Court for the Northern District of California

A writ of coram nobis is an appropriate remedy by which the court can correct errors in criminal convictions where other remedies are not available.
[...]
The government has, however, while not confessing error, taken a position tantamount to a confession of error. It has eagerly moved to dismiss without acknowledging any specific reasons for dismissal other than that "there is no further usefulness to be served by conviction under a statute which has been soundly repudiated." (R.T. 13:20-22, November 10, 1983). In support of this statement, the government points out that in 1971, legislation was adopted requiring congressional action before an Executive Order such as Executive Order 9066 can ever be issued again; that in 1976, the statute under which petitioner was convicted was repealed; and that in 1976, all authority conferred by Executive Order 9066 was formally proclaimed terminated as of December 31, 1946. While these are compelling reasons for concluding that vacating the conviction is in the best interests of this petitioner, respondent and the public, the court declines the invitation of the government to treat this matter in the perfunctory and procedurally improper manner it has suggested.

On the other hand, this court agrees that it is not necessary to reopen the partially healed wounds of an earlier period in order to perform its role of conducting independent judicial review. Fortunately, there are few instances in our judicial history when courts have been called upon to undo such profound and publicly acknowledged injustice. Such extraordinary instances require extraordinary relief, and the court is not without power to redress its own errors.
[...]
The Commission found that military necessity did not warrant the exclusion and detention of ethnic Japanese. It concluded that "broad historical causes which shaped these decisions [exclusion and detention] *1417 were race prejudice, war hysteria and a failure of political leadership." As a result, "a grave injustice was done to American citizens and resident aliens of Japanese ancestry who, without individual review or any probative evidence against them, were excluded, removed and detained by the United States during World War II."