Ca loses, Tx and Fla too

[rightwinger]

If President Donald Trump succeeds in getting immigrants in the country illegally excluded from being counted in the redrawing of U.S. House districts, California, Florida and Texas would end up with one less congressional seat each than if every resident were counted

Already been ruled on multiple times.

The Constitution says persons, not citizens

 

[BluesLegend]

It is highly doubtful he can legally do this, without changing the Constitution. It would also be almost impossible to implement, it is political theatre to jazz up his base and distract from his political problems.

It was illegal for Obama to do DACA, but he did it anyway, and some how got away with it.

Apples and oranges. Nice deflection though.

Apples and oranges are both types of fruit. If one president enact unconstitutional executive orders, so can the next president.

DACA may or may not be unconstitutional since (as Trump has amply shown us) the executive has considerable latitude in how immigration is enforced. What does it or Obama have to do with the census and redrawing of districts?

Look, Obama was unable to convince the peoples representatives in the House and Senate to change immigration law. So Obama ignored the separation of powers, ignored congress and the will of the people and simply ignored the law on his own. That should concern every American citizen.

 

[toobfreak]

California, Florida, Texas lose House seats with Trump order

If President Donald Trump succeeds in getting immigrants in the country illegally excluded from being counted in the redrawing of U.S. House districts, California, Florida and Texas would end up with one less congressional seat each than if every resident were counted, according to an analysis...

www.yahoo.com

" ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — If President Donald Trump succeeds in getting immigrants in the country illegally excluded from being counted in the redrawing of U.S. House districts, California, Florida and Texas would end up with one less congressional seat each than if every resident were counted, according to an analysis by a think tank. "

"The Democratic-led House Committee on Oversight and Reform is asking Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Census Bureau director Steven Dillingham and other officials to testify about the Republican president's directive at a hearing next Wednesday."


I hope its televised, I plan on watching.

Too funny!! The California vote equals the illegal vote? Isn't that election tampering and foreign interference?

 

[BigDave]

California, Florida, Texas lose House seats with Trump order

If President Donald Trump succeeds in getting immigrants in the country illegally excluded from being counted in the redrawing of U.S. House districts, California, Florida and Texas would end up with one less congressional seat each than if every resident were counted, according to an analysis...

www.yahoo.com

" ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — If President Donald Trump succeeds in getting immigrants in the country illegally excluded from being counted in the redrawing of U.S. House districts, California, Florida and Texas would end up with one less congressional seat each than if every resident were counted, according to an analysis by a think tank. "

"The Democratic-led House Committee on Oversight and Reform is asking Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Census Bureau director Steven Dillingham and other officials to testify about the Republican president's directive at a hearing next Wednesday."


I hope its televised, I plan on watching.

A big loss for the People's Republic of California. President TrumpCommunistic Democrats

 

[Coyote]

It is highly doubtful he can legally do this, without changing the Constitution. It would also be almost impossible to implement, it is political theatre to jazz up his base and distract from his political problems.

It was illegal for Obama to do DACA, but he did it anyway, and some how got away with it.

Apples and oranges. Nice deflection though.

Apples and oranges are both types of fruit. If one president enact unconstitutional executive orders, so can the next president.

DACA may or may not be unconstitutional since (as Trump has amply shown us) the executive has considerable latitude in how immigration is enforced. What does it or Obama have to do with the census and redrawing of districts?

Look, Obama was unable to convince the peoples representatives in the House and Senate to change immigration law. So Obama ignored the separation of powers, ignored congress and the will of the people and simply ignored the law on his own. That should concern every American citizen.

The way our process works....Constitutionality is challenged in the courts, and not public opinion, right?

Either way, Obama isn’t in office, hasn’t been for almost 4 years. This isn’t DACA. This is apportionment and representation. So is your argument soley “but Obama did it”?

 

[Coyote]

California, Florida, Texas lose House seats with Trump order

If President Donald Trump succeeds in getting immigrants in the country illegally excluded from being counted in the redrawing of U.S. House districts, California, Florida and Texas would end up with one less congressional seat each than if every resident were counted, according to an analysis...

www.yahoo.com

" ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — If President Donald Trump succeeds in getting immigrants in the country illegally excluded from being counted in the redrawing of U.S. House districts, California, Florida and Texas would end up with one less congressional seat each than if every resident were counted, according to an analysis by a think tank. "

"The Democratic-led House Committee on Oversight and Reform is asking Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Census Bureau director Steven Dillingham and other officials to testify about the Republican president's directive at a hearing next Wednesday."


I hope its televised, I plan on watching.

A big loss for the People's Republic of California. President TrumpCommunistic Democrats

It would be the same loss for red Florida and Texas..you realize that right?

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

It is highly doubtful he can legally do this, without changing the Constitution. It would also be almost impossible to implement, it is political theatre to jazz up his base and distract from his political problems.

So, while the Right has to follow the Constitution and apply it in dealing with the Left......
the Left is free to totally disregard the Constitution and do as it pleases you insist?

I see

 

[Coyote]

It is highly doubtful he can legally do this, without changing the Constitution. It would also be almost impossible to implement, it is political theatre to jazz up his base and distract from his political problems.

So, while the Right has to follow the Constitution and apply it in dealing with the Left......
the Left is free to totally disregard the Constitution and do as it pleases you insist?

I see

Na...I don’t think you see. I am ok with letting our courts determine the constitutionality of a law or action. Itis the way our founders set it up. It may not be perfect, but it is better than partisan mobs.

 

[skews13]

It is highly doubtful he can legally do this, without changing the Constitution. It would also be almost impossible to implement, it is political theatre to jazz up his base and distract from his political problems.

Exactly. The Constitution says all of the people will be counted.

You don't get to decide which ones.

 

[candycorn]

It is highly doubtful he can legally do this, without changing the Constitution. It would also be almost impossible to implement, it is political theatre to jazz up his base and distract from his political problems.

It was illegal for Obama to do DACA, but he did it anyway, and some how got away with it.

Apples and oranges. Nice deflection though.

Apples and oranges are both types of fruit. If one president enact unconstitutional executive orders, so can the next president.

You may remember DACA was upheld by the Supreme Court. So it wasn't "unconstitutional". Not even close.

Trump has no play here. It's sabre-rattling to impress his less-than-intelligent supporters.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

It is highly doubtful he can legally do this, without changing the Constitution. It would also be almost impossible to implement, it is political theatre to jazz up his base and distract from his political problems.

It was illegal for Obama to do DACA, but he did it anyway, and some how got away with it.

Apples and oranges. Nice deflection though.

Apples and oranges are both types of fruit. If one president enact unconstitutional executive orders, so can the next president.

You may remember DACA was upheld by the Supreme Court. So it wasn't "unconstitutional". Not even close.

Trump has no play here. It's sabre-rattling to impress his less-than-intelligent supporters.

Right.....right......

Supreme court decisions are only unconstitutional when they don't go along with YOUR ideas of fair........

 

[candycorn]

It is highly doubtful he can legally do this, without changing the Constitution. It would also be almost impossible to implement, it is political theatre to jazz up his base and distract from his political problems.

It was illegal for Obama to do DACA, but he did it anyway, and some how got away with it.

Apples and oranges. Nice deflection though.

Apples and oranges are both types of fruit. If one president enact unconstitutional executive orders, so can the next president.

You may remember DACA was upheld by the Supreme Court. So it wasn't "unconstitutional". Not even close.

Trump has no play here. It's sabre-rattling to impress his less-than-intelligent supporters.

Right.....right......

Supreme court decisions are only unconstitutional when they don't go along with YOUR ideas of fair........

Decisions are "unconstitutional"? Wow; you don't know much about the way it works. Let me fill you in. The court decides what is constitutional and what isn't. They decided DACA didn't violate the constitution.

If they ruled in favor of only counting citizens in the Census; I'd oppose it but it would be constitutional according to the court. I would hope it would get overturned by subsequent courts as they did with Plessey V. Ferguson and the Brown decision.

 

[eagle1462010]

Doesn't really matter.......Depends where the gain versus loses are in those States and in those States that pick them up. The number of reps STAYS THE SAME............Alabama, Mn. and Ohio pick them up.........Even in those States where the voting block is added it will depend on the area affected by redistricting that will matter......Florida has big Blue areas............little Cuba........Texas has places like Austin and near the border Blue...Ohio has red and blue stats..........

Unknown if it makes a difference at all.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Just send them back...end of issue.

They're NOT US citizens and have zero standing

 

[eagle1462010]

Dems fleeing their states are turning red States Purple...........Florida being a prime example........those fleeing the cold and high tax states like New York.........snow birds......flip a major State.......Lose Florida in a presidential election and it will cost you.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

It is highly doubtful he can legally do this, without changing the Constitution. It would also be almost impossible to implement, it is political theatre to jazz up his base and distract from his political problems.

It was illegal for Obama to do DACA, but he did it anyway, and some how got away with it.

Apples and oranges. Nice deflection though.

Apples and oranges are both types of fruit. If one president enact unconstitutional executive orders, so can the next president.

You may remember DACA was upheld by the Supreme Court. So it wasn't "unconstitutional". Not even close.

Trump has no play here. It's sabre-rattling to impress his less-than-intelligent supporters.

Right.....right......

Supreme court decisions are only unconstitutional when they don't go along with YOUR ideas of fair........

Decisions are "unconstitutional"? Wow; you don't know much about the way it works. Let me fill you in. The court decides what is constitutional and what isn't. They decided DACA didn't violate the constitution.

If they ruled in favor of only counting citizens in the Census; I'd oppose it but it would be constitutional according to the court. I would hope it would get overturned by subsequent courts as they did with Plessey V. Ferguson and the Brown decision.

The Job of the Supreme Court by the Constitution is to rule on ambiguities over The Constitutional
It is not their job to create Law or change the Constitution. yet that is exactly what they have done. In accordance with Agenda21

The Affordable Care Act - UNCONSTITUTIONAL - Supreme court betrayed the nation by passing it
DACA - Unconstitutional - But Obama used Executive order to pass it

The problem is when so called Justices become Bench Legislators and decide in favor of UNConstitutional edicts.

That is called TYRANNY.

It is not surprising you would approve since you are an Agenda21 Cultist Lemming

 

[candycorn]

It is highly doubtful he can legally do this, without changing the Constitution. It would also be almost impossible to implement, it is political theatre to jazz up his base and distract from his political problems.

It was illegal for Obama to do DACA, but he did it anyway, and some how got away with it.

Apples and oranges. Nice deflection though.

Apples and oranges are both types of fruit. If one president enact unconstitutional executive orders, so can the next president.

You may remember DACA was upheld by the Supreme Court. So it wasn't "unconstitutional". Not even close.

Trump has no play here. It's sabre-rattling to impress his less-than-intelligent supporters.

Right.....right......

Supreme court decisions are only unconstitutional when they don't go along with YOUR ideas of fair........

Decisions are "unconstitutional"? Wow; you don't know much about the way it works. Let me fill you in. The court decides what is constitutional and what isn't. They decided DACA didn't violate the constitution.

If they ruled in favor of only counting citizens in the Census; I'd oppose it but it would be constitutional according to the court. I would hope it would get overturned by subsequent courts as they did with Plessey V. Ferguson and the Brown decision.

The Job of the Supreme Court by the Constitution is to rule on ambiguities over The Constitutional
It is not their job to create Law or change the Constitution. yet that is exactly what they have done. In accordance with Agenda21

The Affordable Care Act - UNCONSTITUTIONAL - Supreme court betrayed the nation by passing it
DACA - Unconstitutional - But Obama used Executive order to pass it

The problem is when so called Justices become Bench Legislators and decide in favor of UNConstitutional edicts.

That is called TYRANNY.

It is not surprising you would approve since you are an Agenda21 Cultist Lemming

Lol...

Supreme court decisions are only unconstitutional when they don't go along with YOUR ideas of fair........

Sound familiar?

 

[my2¢]

Did a little looking this past week concerning another thread and calculated that a California's representation in the House per capita was 19% less than Wyoming's. With that my thought of counting illegals became an equalizer. Likely this week I'll open up Excel and look into this whole congressional seat apportionment business. Excel and MS Access are my computer games and this one seems easy to figure out and then understand:

Congressional Apportionment - Computing Apportionment - People and Households - U.S. Census Bureau

 

[BluesLegend]

The way our process works....Constitutionality is challenged in the courts, and not public opinion, right?

Excellent debate topic. The US Constitution is to be OBEYED especially by politicians and people granted authority e.g. law enforcement, judicial branch, etc.

You can absolutely challenge and seek a ruling on the constitutionality of something but BEFORE you disobey the Constitution. Instead what's been happening is politicians and people granted authority are willfully disobeying and ignoring the Constitution in a lawless manner, then turning the process upside down forcing we the people to challenge their lawlessness in court to overturn it.

 

[Billiejeens]

It is highly doubtful he can legally do this, without changing the Constitution. It would also be almost impossible to implement, it is political theatre to jazz up his base and distract from his political problems.

It was illegal for Obama to do DACA, but he did it anyway, and some how got away with it.

Apples and oranges. Nice deflection though.

No it's apples and apples
One just tastes bitter to you