Judge denies DOJ request to change lawyers in census
20 responses | 0 likes
Started by metmike - July 10, 2019, 1:30 a.m.

Judge denies DOJ request to change lawyers in census citizenship question case

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new-york-judge-denies-doj-request-to-change-lawyers-in-census-citizenship-question-case


Comments
By metmike - July 10, 2019, 1:30 a.m.
Like Reply
By metmike - July 10, 2019, 1:31 a.m.
Like Reply

Cruz argues citizenship question on census is 'basic common sense'


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EIJ42inH0I

By metmike - July 10, 2019, 1:43 a.m.
Like Reply
By metmike - July 10, 2019, 1:57 a.m.
Like Reply

From the US Census Bureau:

Why We Ask Questions About...
Place of Birth, Citizenship, Year of Entry


https://www.census.gov/acs/www/about/why-we-ask-each-question/citizenship/

"We ask questions about a person’s place of birth, citizenship, and year of entry into the United States to create data about citizens, noncitizens, and the foreign-born population.

Agencies and policymakers use our published statistics to set and evaluate immigration policies and laws, understand the experience of different immigrant groups, and enforce laws, policies, and regulations against discrimination based on national origin. These statistics also help tailor services to accommodate cultural differences."



By TimNew - July 10, 2019, 5:28 a.m.
Like Reply

I've yet to hear a rational argument in support of opposing a citizenship question on the census. 

Has anyone?

Pelosi's (the lefts) argument that this will intimidate  some US "population" is a joke.  Notice, she never uses the term "Citizens".  Why would a US citizen be intimidated by a question asking their citizenship?

"He wants to make sure certain people are counted".   Ya mean, like, US citizens in the US Census?  Such a "disgrace".

The real disgrace here,  and a point of real concern, is that the left apparently feels as tho they have advanced their agenda far enough that they don't even have to pretend anymore.

And she honestly feels that a census including US citizens is an attempt to"Make America White Again"?  Madam Pelosi, last I checked, US citizenship includes people of all colors. Are you out of touch or just dishonest?

By mcfarmer - July 10, 2019, 7:54 a.m.
Like Reply

Mike is correct, the question is already on the ACS.



“Furthermore, when the Census Bureau was sued in 1980, the government argued at the time that "any effort to ascertain citizenship will inevitably jeopardize the overall accuracy of the population count" – an argument the bureau has consistently upheld over the years. Thus, we already have access to quality data on our citizens and non-citizens alike through the ACS and this effort will simply result in less accurate data.”


When an item is added at the last minute I think it is incumbent on you to state why it should be added, not why it shouldn’t.



Original source

By TimNew - July 10, 2019, 8:49 a.m.
Like Reply

The ACS is an annual function that is not used to define congressional districts or electoral votes,  but you are correct,  it does contain a citizenship question.  I guess that begs the question, why is there no objection to said question here,  but there is on the Census?   I suppose the fact that the census IS used to define congressional districts and electoral votes is a compelling reason, to some, for the inclusion of illegal aliens. 

"When an item is added at the last minute I think it is incumbent on you to state why it should be added, not why it shouldn’t." 

I guess we could quibble over the concept of "Last Minute",  but this effort was begun late last year.  And I can think of plenty of reasons why non-citizens should be excluded from defining congressional and electoral representation . 

By mcfarmer - July 10, 2019, 3:35 p.m.
Like Reply

The courts are charged with interpretation and considering  intent. 


Don’t have to look any further than Thomas Hofeller to tell that.

By carlberky - July 10, 2019, 4:53 p.m.
Like Reply

https://newrepublic.com/article/154041/hofeller-republicans-rig-census

The New York Times reported on Thursday that the estranged daughter of Thomas Hofeller, the GOP operative who had “achieved near-mythic status in the Republican Party as the Michelangelo of gerrymandering,” had discovered some hard drives. Those hard drives—left in storage when Thomas died last year—revealed that Hofeller played a central role in the Trump administration’s decision to push for the citizenship question on the census. Why? No need to guess—Hofeller recorded it for posterity (or some other reason he took to the grave): Doing so “would be advantageous to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites.”

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross told Congress that he included the question at the behest of the Department of Justice. But Ross’s own emails later revealed it to be the other way around—the Commerce Secretary was pushing for the citizenship questions nearly a year before DOJ took it up. It was Ross and his allies in Commerce that directed the Department of Justice on the question.

... they (Republicans) will continue to claim that their maps pass constitutional muster—but Hofeller was the cartographer on many of these maps, and the architect of many of the strategies used to make and defend them. And it is the materials found in Hofeller’s locker that now show everyone what’s really going on.

By mcfarm - July 10, 2019, 6:14 p.m.
Like Reply

"it shows what is really going on"  sorry, somebody is going to have to further explain how a US census that counts US citizens is somehow making America white again....simple craziness

By metmike - July 10, 2019, 7:15 p.m.
Like Reply

We can also say the  same thing at the southern border.............Republicans are discriminating against brown people because they want America to stay white and thus, we should not follow or enforce immigration laws and should have open borders.

However, we should use common sense and toss out what political side benefits from open borders and what side benefits from enforcing laws and use common sense to make the right choice.

Which brings us to the no brainer choice of controlling immigration to manageable levels and using legal channels. 

On the census, we should also throw out what side benefits from asking the question of citizenship and which side benefits from not asking. In assigning a political motive by one or both sides, we lose sight of making the RIGHT choice for our country and its legal citizens.  Assigning political motives, whether legit or not should not muddy the waters of doing the right thing for Americans.  After all, that's exactly who funds the government to serve them. 


 So, absent the politics, does it make sense to ask people living in the US if they are US citizens on a census that asks them many dozens of other questions?

I think the question should be posed this way. Why wouldn't you ask this on a census trying to find out about people living in the US(absent political reasons)????

If the answer is that they might be afraid to respond because they are illegal, then you are saying that we have to adjust our US census to accomodate illegal aliens to make sure we don't discriminate against them for breaking our laws and to have a better count of ALL people...............even though the census by design asks specific question that distinguishes men from women, older from younger, whites from blacks and so on.  Why  wouldn't a country (and majority of its people) want to know how many people living inside its borders are legal citizens?


By carlberky - July 10, 2019, 9:58 p.m.
Like Reply

https://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_cens.html

Today, the controlling law for the U.S. Census is Title 13 of the U.S. Code That law requires that the census be conducted on or about April 1, 1980, and every ten years after that. The returns must be made available within nine months in order to apportion members of the House of Representatives to each of the states.
In 2010, the Census Bureau trimmed the questionnaire to just the basics: name, gender, race, and ethnicity or each person, and whether the dwelling was owned, rented, or "occupied without payment of rent."

if it ain't broke don't fix it. Bert Lance


By mcfarm - July 10, 2019, 10:10 p.m.
Like Reply

one might guess then that dear bert lance had an assumption of counting US citizens...as would any thinking person....if indeed we are to proportion US delegates...as we all know the left would never think it reasonable for illegals to vote here

By TimNew - July 11, 2019, 3:51 a.m.
Like Reply

"if it ain't broke don't fix it."

My argument is that if the census is causing the US to use illegal aliens for the assignment of congressional and electoral representation,  it is broke.

Change my mind.


By carlberky - July 11, 2019, 5:42 a.m.
Like Reply

" the census is causing the US to use illegal aliens for the assignment of congressional and electoral representation"

The Founding Fathers (God love 'em!) counted non-voting slaves in the early censuses, to get an accurate count for people to be counted in the district.

By TimNew - July 11, 2019, 6:08 a.m.
Like Reply

Yes,  slaves were counted as 3/5's...   Kind of an embarrassing compromise in retrospect,  but consistent with the times.   However,  they were identified as slaves, and further,  were not here illegally.  We'll set the moral questions aside for now.

No one is opposed to counting illegal aliens.  They are just asking that they, like the slaves, be identified as such.

By carlberky - July 11, 2019, 7:31 a.m.
Like Reply

They are just asking that they, like the slaves, be identified as such.

Why? 

By TimNew - July 11, 2019, 7:56 a.m.
Like Reply

Are we getting into a circular debate here?   You don't generally engage in such,  so I'll assume there is a breakdown somewhere.

Why?  Because illegal aliens should not be a factor in the definition of congressional representation or electoral votes.  The system is designed to represent citizens.  This includes convicted felons who have lost their right to vote. It does not,  or at least should not, include illegal aliens..  Even if it helps the dem party.

By carlberky - July 11, 2019, 9:07 a.m.
Like Reply

The system is designed to represent citizens.  

Not true. "Because you are living in the United States, you are required by law to respond to this survey." That includes foreign students and hired workers from all over the world, so the question would not even give a true count of illegals.

Tim, about debates, you are correct. I don't want to engage in useless debates, but there were so many flaws in this thread that I couldn't help myself. I'm done.

By TimNew - July 11, 2019, 9:30 a.m.
Like Reply

You are mixing things Carl,  but I'll just assume I have not explained my position well enough.

The Census is designed to count all residents including immigrants, legal or otherwise.

The System  of representative government is designed to represent citizens.

I have yet to hear an argument that supports a representative government, in the form or congressional reps or electoral votes that includes illegal aliens.

I can see the federal government allocating resources, even tax dollars to deal with the reality of illegal aliens. I don't like it,  but I can accept is as a necessary evil.  I can't see a federal representation that is formed, even partially, based on illegal alien population.