You're kidding, I hope. Levin really wrote that? Yearrrgghhh.
No, I'm not kidding; it's one of the four examples he gives early on in Men in Black so that we'll all know what he's talking about. (Another is Plessy v. Ferguson, by the way, so feel free to Yearrrgghhh again.)
What's even funnier is that toward the end of the book, he comments favorably on FDR's court-packing plan as a way to keep the judiciary under control. I guess he either didn't notice or didn't care that Korematsu was the sort of decision that resulted.
You know, I haven't read his book yet, mainly because I've always gotten a bad vibe from Levin in general - considering that logical consistency is obviously not on tap in his latest work, I see no reason to question my gut feeling. On the other hand, what the hell - 20'th century jurisprudence is littered with folks who discarded principle in favor of noble ends, so what's one more, right?