In August of 1943, the Attorney General commissioned a report on the Army’s Individual Exclusion Program—which he disagreed with. The Preliminary Report, cited here, comprised a stunning rebuke of the entire rationale for the program. The last paragraph in section 1, above, is stunningly direct in its criticism of the term “potentially dangerous” used to justify exclusion: Practically, the use of phrases such as this suggests that those who use them hold the view that a subject of an exclusion case must be excluded unless it is clear that there is no reason to exclude him. This is analogous to saying that the burden of proof is on the excludee, although the excludee, of course, cannot meet the burden, since he is not advised of the charges against him.