Rediscovering Oyama v. California: At the Intersection of Property, Race and Citizenship

65 Pages Posted: 9 Jun 2010  

Rose Cuison Villazor

Rutgers Law School

Date Written: June 7, 2010


Oyama v. California was a landmark case in the history of civil rights. Decided in January 1948, Oyama held unconstitutional a provision of California’s Alien Land Law, which allowed the state to take an escheat action on property given to U.S. citizens that had been purchased by their parents who were not eligible to become citizens. At the time, the country’s naturalization law prohibited Japanese nationals from becoming U.S. citizens. Thus, the Alien Land Law applied primarily to Japanese nationals and Japanese Americans. Critically, Oyama recognized that the state’s attempted taking of a citizen’s property because his father was Japanese constituted a violation of his equal protection rights. In so doing, Oyama created a paradigm shift in the treatment of property rights of Japanese Americans.

Despite its significance, Oyama has received surprisingly little attention in legal scholarship. Leading constitutional and property law casebooks have virtually ignored the case. This Article seeks to correct that oversight. As this Article argues, Oyama fills a neglected void in our collective historical understanding of race, property law, and citizenship. Equally important, it provides a timely normative and prescriptive response to contentious contemporary debates about the validity of state and local law restrictions on leaseholds against a select group of noncitizens, namely undocumented immigrants. By calling attention to the historical and contemporary contributions of this largely unnoticed case, this Article argues why Oyama should be included in the canons of property and constitutional laws.

Keywords: Property, Immigration, Citizenship, Race, Land Use

Suggested Citation

Villazor, Rose Cuison, Rediscovering Oyama v. California: At the Intersection of Property, Race and Citizenship (June 7, 2010). Washington University Law Review, Vol. 87, p. 979, 2010; Hofstra University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 10-39. Available at SSRN:

Rose Cuison Villazor (Contact Author)

Rutgers Law School ( email )

United States

Register to save articles to
your library


Paper statistics

Abstract Views