NO CITIZENSHIP Question on 2020 Census form.

It would seem to me that the makeup of the House of Representatives, and the varying funding mechanisms associated with it, should be based upon the people living in the country.

That is exactly how the Framers wrote the Constitution.

 

It would seem everyone agreed with this analysis. Good, the post required a bit of research.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote, "Accepting contrived reasons would defeat the purpose of the enterprise." "Contrived" is judicial code for lying. The true purpose was redistricting for GOP benefit, and the Trump administration lied in its brief.

 

Nope!

 

You can put lipstick on a pig, and it is still a pig.

 

Nope! Not to me. Not to the Constitution. Not to our founding fathers. Not to SCOTUS

 

Jestsayin said: ↑
So you are against knowing how many US citizens are living in this country.

BUZZZZZ! That is precisely the primary reason for the census per the Constitution.

 

SCOTUS ruled that including the citizenship question was within the law, but they did not like the rationale that Trump used. The latter is none of their damn business is is beyond the scope of their responsibility and authority. Another court ruling based on personal preferences, not on law.

 

Back in the day when they wrote the constitution anyone that reached our shores could become a citizen!!!

 

....... and what has this to do about anything??????

 

Wrong!

It is to count the number of "persons".

 

Right. And no rationale exists.

 

Ever trap raccoons with 3 nails and a piece of tinfoil? You guys can’t let go of the shiny object. It will be your undoing.

 

Counting all people would negate the purpose of the census?

 

Wrong. The purpose of the census is to adjust and set the representation in the House based on the number of citizens in each state. Do you think they count state officials and visitors? Well, they don't Only citizens can be used to allocate representatives.

 

No rationale is necessary for an executive decision on carrying out the census within the law.... so said Roberts.

 

Given that the admin's attempt to add the question was a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act it is outside the law. Not to mention how completely transparent the admin has been in its deceitful rationale and obvious goal of advantaging the GOP. Roberts noted the lies of the admin in gentile fashion but made his point clear nonetheless.

"In the Secretary’s telling, Commerce was simply acting on a routine data request from another agency. Yet the materials before us indicate that Commerce went to great lengths to elicit the request from DOJ (or any other willing agency)," he continued. "And unlike a typical case in which an agency may have both stated and unstated reasons for a decision, here the VRA enforcement rationale—the sole stated reason—seems to have been contrived. We are presented, in other words, with an explanation for agency action that is incongruent with what the record reveals about the agency’s priorities and decision making process."

https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...ules-against-trump-administration-over-census

 

Personally I don't see the big deal here on either side. Illegalls will just say they are citizens so the left is worked up over nothing and the right is wasting their time hoping illegals will suddenly become truthful on census polls. Non issue to me.

 

There is a reason why I am the one who always uses quotes and you never do. And it's that facts always stand in the way of your delusions.

"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons..."​

 

There is no refutation here other than the incorrect assertion that the census question was illegal. If you think it was illegal, take it up with the Chief Justice who said it was legal. Everything in your quote from the ruling is of no concern to SCOTUS, none of their business, and has no place in a judicial ruling.

 

... and in your fantasy world you must think the framers did not mean citizens but meant anyone who happened by. Since it is axiomatic they saw no need to clarify what they meant by people. Did the Canadians and the French and the Indians help form and frame the Constitution? What do you suppose "We the people of the United States...." means? Quoting something does not prove understanding. This is beyond ludicrous.

 

I agree. It is beyond ludicrous. Because you ignore how Courts, including SCOTUS have ruled on this very issue.

Since you don't know the law, you will be surprised to learn that "We the People" and "persons" does include foreign citizens who live in the U.S. Even illegal immigrants!

This isn't even under dispute in the law. But you have learned something today. And you should be happy about that.

So your problem is not only not quoting. It's also not understanding. That's a twofer.

 

Fantasy world? Please read the Constitution some time. They were well aware there were more people in the country than just citizens and they always intended for it to be that way. It is "beyond ludicrous" because you are the one trying to rewrite the words of the framers while pretending that any of use who actually have some concern for their words are mistaken. Try again. Non-citizens have ALWAYS been counted in the census, including for determining House seats. This has been true since ratification.

 

What Roberts says is: "You can add the question, but tell us the truth about why you want to add the question"

So the Trump administration could respond "Ok. We'll tell the truth. The reason we want to add the question is so that immigrants willl be afraid to respond to the census, and that way we will under count blue states (by about 10%, according to experts) where there are many immigrants, thus allotting more representatives to red states and less to blue states. That way Republicans will win more seats in Congress"

Risky move but... who knows. It could work....

 

I'm scratching my head trying to figure out why it isn't unconstitutional to exclude a citizenship question on the census? The 14th Amendment seems to require that information.

 

The purpose of the census is to determine the total number of persons in the United States. Makes no difference if they are citizens or not.