US Supreme Court Signals Support For Trump 2020 Census Citizenship Question

El OchoCinco said:
I believe the forms are not truly anonymous so if someone checks the box about not being a citizen they are afraid they will then get a visit from ICE. Then you could see many people not bother to answer the question at all.

Is the census a count of people in each state or a count of U.S. citizens in each state. Seems reading the constitution for the latter is too much of a stretch.
More...

Basically this. Nobody trusts Trump admin to not use collected answers to start kicking people out. Don't even know when the next census is TBH, but the over reach of this admin on immigrants will spook any foreigner for generations.
 
Here4money said:
Basically this. Nobody trusts Trump admin to not use collected answers to start kicking people out.
More...

Depends on how the person is identified. It would be illegal to use identifying information from the census to take action against an individual but if aggregate data shows that there is a large number of illegals in an area so enforcement resources are increased in that area, then good, that is one of the purposes of the census- to identify needs and problems in the country.

And if concentrations of illegals are identified in the aggregate, then the government would be remiss if it did not take that into consideration in their enforcement planning. THAT'S THEIR FRIGGING JOB AND OBLIGATION TO THE COUNTRY. ILLEGALS SHOULD NOT BE HERE. If the illegals dont like it then maybe they should not respond to the census. Doesnt bother me an iota if their presence does not count toward getting federal funds or increased congressional representation in that district.

That's right. You heard me.
 
Last edited:
UsualName said:
Because of the constitutional importance and critical need for accuracy the census bureau has a standing policy to test new questions and practices for decreasing accuracy. That practice was bypassed in this matter.
More...

This NOT a new question. How do Dems get so butt hurt over something so old?

https://www.npr.org/2019/04/23/6305...sts-and-turns-of-census-citizenship-questions

Reminds me how they just discovered collusion is not a crime and now their talking point is conspiracy. Idiots.
 
UsualName said:
The constitution is very clear in that the census is to count residents, not citizens, for apportionment.
More...
It's also been made very clear in the past that the federal government has the right to ask additional questions on the census beyond just residency.

https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/about/census-constitution.html
Questions beyond a simple count are Constitutional
It is constitutional to include questions in the decennial census beyond those concerning a simple count of the number of people. On numerous occasions, the courts have said the Constitution gives Congress the authority to collect statistics in the census. As early as 1870, the Supreme Court characterized as unquestionable the power of Congress to require both an enumeration and the collection of statistics in the census. The Legal Tender Cases, Tex.1870; 12 Wall., U.S., 457, 536, 20 L.Ed. 287. In 1901, a District Court said the Constitution's census clause (Art. 1, Sec. 2, Clause 3) is not limited to a headcount of the population and "does not prohibit the gathering of other statistics, if 'necessary and proper,' for the intelligent exercise of other powers enumerated in the constitution, and in such case there could be no objection to acquiring this information through the same machinery by which the population is enumerated." United States v. Moriarity, 106 F. 886, 891 (S.D.N.Y.1901).
 
LS1Z28 said:
It's also been made very clear in the past that the federal government has the right to ask additional questions on the census beyond just residency.

https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/about/census-constitution.html
Questions beyond a simple count are Constitutional
It is constitutional to include questions in the decennial census beyond those concerning a simple count of the number of people. On numerous occasions, the courts have said the Constitution gives Congress the authority to collect statistics in the census. As early as 1870, the Supreme Court characterized as unquestionable the power of Congress to require both an enumeration and the collection of statistics in the census. The Legal Tender Cases, Tex.1870; 12 Wall., U.S., 457, 536, 20 L.Ed. 287. In 1901, a District Court said the Constitution's census clause (Art. 1, Sec. 2, Clause 3) is not limited to a headcount of the population and "does not prohibit the gathering of other statistics, if 'necessary and proper,' for the intelligent exercise of other powers enumerated in the constitution, and in such case there could be no objection to acquiring this information through the same machinery by which the population is enumerated." United States v. Moriarity, 106 F. 886, 891 (S.D.N.Y.1901).
More...

Wha....Trump's census giving lip service on their website? You don't say. I'd say read the constitution instead.
 
LS1Z28 said:
It's also been made very clear in the past that the federal government has the right to ask additional questions on the census beyond just residency.

https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/decennial-census/about/census-constitution.html
Questions beyond a simple count are Constitutional
It is constitutional to include questions in the decennial census beyond those concerning a simple count of the number of people. On numerous occasions, the courts have said the Constitution gives Congress the authority to collect statistics in the census. As early as 1870, the Supreme Court characterized as unquestionable the power of Congress to require both an enumeration and the collection of statistics in the census. The Legal Tender Cases, Tex.1870; 12 Wall., U.S., 457, 536, 20 L.Ed. 287. In 1901, a District Court said the Constitution's census clause (Art. 1, Sec. 2, Clause 3) is not limited to a headcount of the population and "does not prohibit the gathering of other statistics, if 'necessary and proper,' for the intelligent exercise of other powers enumerated in the constitution, and in such case there could be no objection to acquiring this information through the same machinery by which the population is enumerated." United States v. Moriarity, 106 F. 886, 891 (S.D.N.Y.1901).
More...

There’s no doubt about this. As I have mentioned before the regular process for which a change to the census is made was bypassed in this instance. The census has no idea of how it will impact the resident count, which is what is critical to the census.

All of you right wingers are not addressing this but it is the central issue of the case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top