Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No information gathered by the census will alter the number of representatives per state by merely adding the question of citizenship. All residents who respond will still be counted regardless of citizenship.Nonsense.It appears with all the noise about the question “Is this person a citizen of the United States?” we are overlooking Justice Roberts has usurped legislative power by second guessing a legitimate policy making decision.
In regard to this assumption of power Justice Stone reminds us that:
”The power of courts to declare a statute unconstitutional is subject to two guiding principles of decision which ought never to be absent from judicial consciousness. One is that courts are concerned only with the power to enact statutes, not with their wisdom. The other is that while unconstitutional exercise of power by the executive and legislative branches of the government is subject to judicial restraint, the only check upon our own exercise of power is our own sense of self-restraint. For the removal of unwise laws from the statute books appeal lies, not to the courts, but to the ballot and to the processes of democratic government.” U.S. v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1, 78-79 (1936)
Additionally, the court in Hillis v. Department of Ecology, 131 Wash. 2d 373, 932 P.2d 139 (1997) pointed out:
”Just because we [the courts] do not think the legislators have acted wisely or responsibly does not give us the right to assume their duties or to substitute our judgment for theirs.”
And, in ELDRED et al. v. ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL (2003) the court unmistakably confirmed:
…..we are not at liberty to second-guess congressional determinations and policy judgments of this order, however debatable or arguably unwise they may be…The wisdom of Congress' action, however, is not within our province to second guess.
And finally, Justice Black, quite eloquently addressed the issue as follows:
"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges' views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." – Justice Hugo L. Black (U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968
The bottom line is, Justice Obamacare-Roberts has repeatedly violate the most fundamental cannons and principles of our constitutionally limited system of government and the fundamental rules of constitutional construction by interfering with a legitimate question being replaced on our census form . . . “Is this person a citizen of the United States?”
JWK
Without a Fifth Column Media and Yellow Journalism [ourMSM], the crisis at our southern border would never have grown to what now amounts to an outright invasion and threatens the general welfare of the United States.
The decision has nothing to do with determining the constitutionality of an act of Congress.
.
Baloney. Congress delegated almost unlimited power to the Executive Office over the censes. Additionally, we are talking about a policy making decision, which is not within the courts assigned duty to second guess.
JWK
And you would be wrong. The Census is NOT the purview of the Executive branch. The numbers gathered are for the use of the Congress, in setting spending priorities, not the Executive branch.
The conduct and tabulation of census data is the purview of the executive branch. That data is used by every level of government for various purposes. But the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US.
.
It doesn't answer the question.That doesn't answer the question since non-U.S. citizens are counted towards apportioning representatives.It distinguishes citizens from non-citizens as required by the Second Section of the 14th Amendment.And still no answer to the question, how does adding a citizenship question help in terms of apportioning representation?
Why was it constitutional for Obama’s Census Bureau to ask “Is this person a citizen of the United States”, and un-constitutional for today’s Census Bureau to ask the very same question? Keep in mind that Section 2 of the 14th Amendment requires the distinction between citizens and non-citizens to be made with reference to apportionment.
It appears Justice Roberts believes he is vested with a power to strike down laws and policy making decisions that do not meet his personal sense of fairness, reasonableness and justice, which in fact is second guessing our Constitution which actually requires, by Section 2 of the 14th Amendment to make a distinction between citizens and non-citizens with reference to apportionment.
Justice Roberts, who also embraced our federal government entering the states and meddling with the people’s unalienable right to make their own medical choices and decisions, needs to be held accountable for his acts of sedition and personal war against our Constitution.
JWK
"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges’ views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." – Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968
Oh, but it does answer the question. Our Constitution requires the question to be asked.
A Justices’ job is not to second guess the wisdom or legitimacy of legislative acts and policy making decisions which are within the four walls of the Constitution. Its only job is to decide if such acts are within the four walls of the Constitution. And with respect to asking the question "Is this person a citizen of the United States", the fact is, the Second Section of the 14th Amendment requires the distinction to be made between citizens and non-citizens with respect to apportionment, which is why we have a census and requires the question to be asked.
JWK
Pointing to the part of the second section which states disenfranchised voters (i.e., citizens) shout not be counted; cannot be ascertained by simply asking if they're U.S. citizens. Therefore, there is no point in asking that if the goal is to determine how many citizens should not be counted because they're disenfranchised.
The purpose of the census and a constitutional requirement is that we count everyone, not citizens.Whatwhy do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?The question on the census will give you an inaccurate count..
Why do you want an inaccurate census count????
Tell us.
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
Is it not you, who is pimping for the 'right Trumpers' without no cause or purpose?why do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?The question on the census will give you an inaccurate count..
Why do you want an inaccurate census count????
Tell us.
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
the Census question does not identify documented immigrants from undocumented immigrants from those on Refugee status....
So, ONCE AGAIN:
What is the purpose?
We already know what the purpose to do such was from the Republican operativer. Hofeller, who planned the question to be put on to the census... Hofeller's partner in crime friend went to work for and did work for Secretary Wilbur Ross as an advisor. The exact wording used by Ross to justify the question was in Hofeller's 2017 notes on his computer that his daughter found after he died, and she turned them over to shed light on them.
Court records show that Mr. Neuman, a decades-long friend of Mr. Hofeller’s, later became an informal adviser on census issues to Mr. Ross, the commerce secretary. By that summer, a top aide to Mr. Ross was pressing the Justice Department to say that it required detailed data from a census citizenship question to better enforce the Voting Rights Act.
It was to primarily disenfranchise the citizen Hispanic voter, (in Texas to start) thru computerized data gerrymandering drawn from the census...that would be used in the new redistricting maps that are to be drawn from the 2020 census.
History of Hofeller: Dead Republican operative’s electronic records at the core of two major legal battles
Opponents of the Trump administration's plan to include a citizenship question on the 2020 U.S. census say records found on a hard drive in Hofeller's home unmask partisan intent, including language nearly identical to the Justice Department's stated justification for the question: aiding enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the rationale seemed contrived and sent the case back to a lower court in New York.
Hofeller's records also prompted a new court filing in North Carolina’s redistricting litigation, suggesting that Republicans lied about how long drawing new maps would take.
In Republican political circles, Hofeller earned near-legendary status as a behind-the-scenes number cruncher who used voter and election data to draw maps he believed would comply with ever-changing redistricting rules over the decades — and help his party.
Through the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and later a consulting firm, Hofeller said he had analyzed and drafted district plans in more than half the states. His resume included a role in more than 30 redistricting lawsuits, where he was usually defending a map that favored Republicans or finding fault with one that boosted Democrats.
In the late 2000s, he was involved in the so-called RedMap project, a full-throttled effort to win as many state legislative seats for the GOP in 2010 as possible. That class of lawmakers would control the formulation of new district boundaries for state and federal legislative seats, cementing GOP power for a decade.
The plan worked. As the tea party helped the GOP take control of the U.S. House of Representatives, the party also flipped control of 21 state legislative chambers. The resulting maps have helped keep the GOP in power even in some states where more votes are cast for Democrats.
"They were strategic in understanding the ramifications of redistricting. Tom understood that," said Tim Storey, a redistricting expert at the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), who knew Hofeller for years. "There was no Tom Hofeller on the Democratic side."
The strategy weakened the political power of African Americans and Democrats, making Hofeller's work reviled among opponents who claimed it ran afoul of the Constitution.
And regarding this census, here was Hofeller's and the administration's purpose of under representing legal Hispanic voters and increasing the value of white citizen voters.
Deceased G.O.P. Strategist’s Hard Drives Reveal New Details on the Census Citizenship Question
The documents cited in the Thursday court filing include an unpublished August 2015 analysis by Mr. Hofeller, who was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative news outlet financially backed by Paul Singer, a billionaire New York hedge fund manager and major Republican donor. Mr. Hofeller’s charge was to assess the impact of drawing political maps that were not based on a state’s total population — the current practice virtually everywhere in the nation — but on a slice of that population: American citizens of voting age.
At the time, the study’s sponsor was considering whether to finance a lawsuit by conservative legal advocates that argued that counting voting-age citizens was not merely acceptable, but required by the Constitution.
Mr. Hofeller’s exhaustive analysis of Texas state legislative districts concluded that such maps “would be advantageous to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites,” and would dilute the political power of the state’s Hispanics.
The reason, he wrote, was that the maps would exclude traditionally Democratic Hispanics and their children from the population count. That would force Democratic districts to expand to meet the Constitution’s one person, one vote requirement. In turn, that would translate into fewer districts in traditionally Democratic areas, and a new opportunity for Republican mapmakers to create even stronger gerrymanders.
The strategy carried a fatal flaw, however: The detailed citizenship data that was needed to draw the maps did not exist. The only existing tally of voting-age citizens, Mr. Hofeller's study stated, came from a statistical sample of the population largely used by the Justice Department to verify that the 1965 Voting Rights Act was ensuring the voting rights of minority groups.
“Without a question on citizenship being included on the 2020 Decennial Census questionnaire,” Mr. Hofeller wrote, “the use of citizen voting age population is functionally unworkable.”
Roughly 16 months later, as President-elect Trump prepared to take office, Mr. Hofeller urged Mr. Trump’s transition team to consider adding a citizenship question to the census, the transition official responsible for census issues, Mark Neuman, said last year in a deposition in the Manhattan census lawsuit.
The above is just gibberish and not related to this simple issue on counting citizens on the census which is important to help in many ways
Wrong Dead Wrong
The purpose is to count every citizen
The world census is to count everyone
And no one to be counted more than once and counted only once in their home nation
Only with counting citizens can stop the abuse of many counts for one person. !!!
Imbecile... the purpose of the census is to count the number of people per state, regardless of citizenship, for the purpose of apportioning representation in accordance with the Constitution.The purpose of the census and a constitutional requirement is that we count everyone, not citizens.Whatwhy do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?The question on the census will give you an inaccurate count..
Why do you want an inaccurate census count????
Tell us.
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
Is it not you, who is pimping for the 'right Trumpers' without no cause or purpose?why do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?The question on the census will give you an inaccurate count..
Why do you want an inaccurate census count????
Tell us.
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
the Census question does not identify documented immigrants from undocumented immigrants from those on Refugee status....
So, ONCE AGAIN:
What is the purpose?
We already know what the purpose to do such was from the Republican operativer. Hofeller, who planned the question to be put on to the census... Hofeller's partner in crime friend went to work for and did work for Secretary Wilbur Ross as an advisor. The exact wording used by Ross to justify the question was in Hofeller's 2017 notes on his computer that his daughter found after he died, and she turned them over to shed light on them.
Court records show that Mr. Neuman, a decades-long friend of Mr. Hofeller’s, later became an informal adviser on census issues to Mr. Ross, the commerce secretary. By that summer, a top aide to Mr. Ross was pressing the Justice Department to say that it required detailed data from a census citizenship question to better enforce the Voting Rights Act.
It was to primarily disenfranchise the citizen Hispanic voter, (in Texas to start) thru computerized data gerrymandering drawn from the census...that would be used in the new redistricting maps that are to be drawn from the 2020 census.
History of Hofeller: Dead Republican operative’s electronic records at the core of two major legal battles
Opponents of the Trump administration's plan to include a citizenship question on the 2020 U.S. census say records found on a hard drive in Hofeller's home unmask partisan intent, including language nearly identical to the Justice Department's stated justification for the question: aiding enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the rationale seemed contrived and sent the case back to a lower court in New York.
Hofeller's records also prompted a new court filing in North Carolina’s redistricting litigation, suggesting that Republicans lied about how long drawing new maps would take.
In Republican political circles, Hofeller earned near-legendary status as a behind-the-scenes number cruncher who used voter and election data to draw maps he believed would comply with ever-changing redistricting rules over the decades — and help his party.
Through the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and later a consulting firm, Hofeller said he had analyzed and drafted district plans in more than half the states. His resume included a role in more than 30 redistricting lawsuits, where he was usually defending a map that favored Republicans or finding fault with one that boosted Democrats.
In the late 2000s, he was involved in the so-called RedMap project, a full-throttled effort to win as many state legislative seats for the GOP in 2010 as possible. That class of lawmakers would control the formulation of new district boundaries for state and federal legislative seats, cementing GOP power for a decade.
The plan worked. As the tea party helped the GOP take control of the U.S. House of Representatives, the party also flipped control of 21 state legislative chambers. The resulting maps have helped keep the GOP in power even in some states where more votes are cast for Democrats.
"They were strategic in understanding the ramifications of redistricting. Tom understood that," said Tim Storey, a redistricting expert at the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), who knew Hofeller for years. "There was no Tom Hofeller on the Democratic side."
The strategy weakened the political power of African Americans and Democrats, making Hofeller's work reviled among opponents who claimed it ran afoul of the Constitution.
And regarding this census, here was Hofeller's and the administration's purpose of under representing legal Hispanic voters and increasing the value of white citizen voters.
Deceased G.O.P. Strategist’s Hard Drives Reveal New Details on the Census Citizenship Question
The documents cited in the Thursday court filing include an unpublished August 2015 analysis by Mr. Hofeller, who was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative news outlet financially backed by Paul Singer, a billionaire New York hedge fund manager and major Republican donor. Mr. Hofeller’s charge was to assess the impact of drawing political maps that were not based on a state’s total population — the current practice virtually everywhere in the nation — but on a slice of that population: American citizens of voting age.
At the time, the study’s sponsor was considering whether to finance a lawsuit by conservative legal advocates that argued that counting voting-age citizens was not merely acceptable, but required by the Constitution.
Mr. Hofeller’s exhaustive analysis of Texas state legislative districts concluded that such maps “would be advantageous to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites,” and would dilute the political power of the state’s Hispanics.
The reason, he wrote, was that the maps would exclude traditionally Democratic Hispanics and their children from the population count. That would force Democratic districts to expand to meet the Constitution’s one person, one vote requirement. In turn, that would translate into fewer districts in traditionally Democratic areas, and a new opportunity for Republican mapmakers to create even stronger gerrymanders.
The strategy carried a fatal flaw, however: The detailed citizenship data that was needed to draw the maps did not exist. The only existing tally of voting-age citizens, Mr. Hofeller's study stated, came from a statistical sample of the population largely used by the Justice Department to verify that the 1965 Voting Rights Act was ensuring the voting rights of minority groups.
“Without a question on citizenship being included on the 2020 Decennial Census questionnaire,” Mr. Hofeller wrote, “the use of citizen voting age population is functionally unworkable.”
Roughly 16 months later, as President-elect Trump prepared to take office, Mr. Hofeller urged Mr. Trump’s transition team to consider adding a citizenship question to the census, the transition official responsible for census issues, Mark Neuman, said last year in a deposition in the Manhattan census lawsuit.
The above is just gibberish and not related to this simple issue on counting citizens on the census which is important to help in many ways
Wrong Dead Wrong
The purpose is to count every citizen
The world census is to count everyone
And no one to be counted more than once and counted only once in their home nation
Only with counting citizens can stop the abuse of many counts for one person. !!!
Imbecile... the purpose of the census is to count the number of people per state, regardless of citizenship, for the purpose of apportioning representation in accordance with the Constitution.The purpose of the census and a constitutional requirement is that we count everyone, not citizens.Whatwhy do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
Is it not you, who is pimping for the 'right Trumpers' without no cause or purpose?why do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
the Census question does not identify documented immigrants from undocumented immigrants from those on Refugee status....
So, ONCE AGAIN:
What is the purpose?
We already know what the purpose to do such was from the Republican operativer. Hofeller, who planned the question to be put on to the census... Hofeller's partner in crime friend went to work for and did work for Secretary Wilbur Ross as an advisor. The exact wording used by Ross to justify the question was in Hofeller's 2017 notes on his computer that his daughter found after he died, and she turned them over to shed light on them.
Court records show that Mr. Neuman, a decades-long friend of Mr. Hofeller’s, later became an informal adviser on census issues to Mr. Ross, the commerce secretary. By that summer, a top aide to Mr. Ross was pressing the Justice Department to say that it required detailed data from a census citizenship question to better enforce the Voting Rights Act.
It was to primarily disenfranchise the citizen Hispanic voter, (in Texas to start) thru computerized data gerrymandering drawn from the census...that would be used in the new redistricting maps that are to be drawn from the 2020 census.
History of Hofeller: Dead Republican operative’s electronic records at the core of two major legal battles
Opponents of the Trump administration's plan to include a citizenship question on the 2020 U.S. census say records found on a hard drive in Hofeller's home unmask partisan intent, including language nearly identical to the Justice Department's stated justification for the question: aiding enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the rationale seemed contrived and sent the case back to a lower court in New York.
Hofeller's records also prompted a new court filing in North Carolina’s redistricting litigation, suggesting that Republicans lied about how long drawing new maps would take.
In Republican political circles, Hofeller earned near-legendary status as a behind-the-scenes number cruncher who used voter and election data to draw maps he believed would comply with ever-changing redistricting rules over the decades — and help his party.
Through the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and later a consulting firm, Hofeller said he had analyzed and drafted district plans in more than half the states. His resume included a role in more than 30 redistricting lawsuits, where he was usually defending a map that favored Republicans or finding fault with one that boosted Democrats.
In the late 2000s, he was involved in the so-called RedMap project, a full-throttled effort to win as many state legislative seats for the GOP in 2010 as possible. That class of lawmakers would control the formulation of new district boundaries for state and federal legislative seats, cementing GOP power for a decade.
The plan worked. As the tea party helped the GOP take control of the U.S. House of Representatives, the party also flipped control of 21 state legislative chambers. The resulting maps have helped keep the GOP in power even in some states where more votes are cast for Democrats.
"They were strategic in understanding the ramifications of redistricting. Tom understood that," said Tim Storey, a redistricting expert at the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), who knew Hofeller for years. "There was no Tom Hofeller on the Democratic side."
The strategy weakened the political power of African Americans and Democrats, making Hofeller's work reviled among opponents who claimed it ran afoul of the Constitution.
And regarding this census, here was Hofeller's and the administration's purpose of under representing legal Hispanic voters and increasing the value of white citizen voters.
Deceased G.O.P. Strategist’s Hard Drives Reveal New Details on the Census Citizenship Question
The documents cited in the Thursday court filing include an unpublished August 2015 analysis by Mr. Hofeller, who was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative news outlet financially backed by Paul Singer, a billionaire New York hedge fund manager and major Republican donor. Mr. Hofeller’s charge was to assess the impact of drawing political maps that were not based on a state’s total population — the current practice virtually everywhere in the nation — but on a slice of that population: American citizens of voting age.
At the time, the study’s sponsor was considering whether to finance a lawsuit by conservative legal advocates that argued that counting voting-age citizens was not merely acceptable, but required by the Constitution.
Mr. Hofeller’s exhaustive analysis of Texas state legislative districts concluded that such maps “would be advantageous to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites,” and would dilute the political power of the state’s Hispanics.
The reason, he wrote, was that the maps would exclude traditionally Democratic Hispanics and their children from the population count. That would force Democratic districts to expand to meet the Constitution’s one person, one vote requirement. In turn, that would translate into fewer districts in traditionally Democratic areas, and a new opportunity for Republican mapmakers to create even stronger gerrymanders.
The strategy carried a fatal flaw, however: The detailed citizenship data that was needed to draw the maps did not exist. The only existing tally of voting-age citizens, Mr. Hofeller's study stated, came from a statistical sample of the population largely used by the Justice Department to verify that the 1965 Voting Rights Act was ensuring the voting rights of minority groups.
“Without a question on citizenship being included on the 2020 Decennial Census questionnaire,” Mr. Hofeller wrote, “the use of citizen voting age population is functionally unworkable.”
Roughly 16 months later, as President-elect Trump prepared to take office, Mr. Hofeller urged Mr. Trump’s transition team to consider adding a citizenship question to the census, the transition official responsible for census issues, Mark Neuman, said last year in a deposition in the Manhattan census lawsuit.
The above is just gibberish and not related to this simple issue on counting citizens on the census which is important to help in many ways
Wrong Dead Wrong
The purpose is to count every citizen
The world census is to count everyone
And no one to be counted more than once and counted only once in their home nation
Only with counting citizens can stop the abuse of many counts for one person. !!!
Wrong. You didn't get the point of the OP. It doesn't matter what their motives are. It's not the Court's job to judge motives or wisdom behind any act of government.Republicans fucked themselves on this by using any excuse to justify the question and acting as if the idea of a deliberate under-count of the census never occurred to them. No one likes to be bullshitted to their face.
HolyfuckingshitIt doesn't answer the question.That doesn't answer the question since non-U.S. citizens are counted towards apportioning representatives.It distinguishes citizens from non-citizens as required by the Second Section of the 14th Amendment.And still no answer to the question, how does adding a citizenship question help in terms of apportioning representation?
Why was it constitutional for Obama’s Census Bureau to ask “Is this person a citizen of the United States”, and un-constitutional for today’s Census Bureau to ask the very same question? Keep in mind that Section 2 of the 14th Amendment requires the distinction between citizens and non-citizens to be made with reference to apportionment.
It appears Justice Roberts believes he is vested with a power to strike down laws and policy making decisions that do not meet his personal sense of fairness, reasonableness and justice, which in fact is second guessing our Constitution which actually requires, by Section 2 of the 14th Amendment to make a distinction between citizens and non-citizens with reference to apportionment.
Justice Roberts, who also embraced our federal government entering the states and meddling with the people’s unalienable right to make their own medical choices and decisions, needs to be held accountable for his acts of sedition and personal war against our Constitution.
JWK
"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges’ views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." – Justice Hugo L. Black ( U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968
Oh, but it does answer the question. Our Constitution requires the question to be asked.
A Justices’ job is not to second guess the wisdom or legitimacy of legislative acts and policy making decisions which are within the four walls of the Constitution. Its only job is to decide if such acts are within the four walls of the Constitution. And with respect to asking the question "Is this person a citizen of the United States", the fact is, the Second Section of the 14th Amendment requires the distinction to be made between citizens and non-citizens with respect to apportionment, which is why we have a census and requires the question to be asked.
JWK
Pointing to the part of the second section which states disenfranchised voters (i.e., citizens) shout not be counted; cannot be ascertained by simply asking if they're U.S. citizens. Therefore, there is no point in asking that if the goal is to determine how many citizens should not be counted because they're disenfranchised.
Go read the Second Section of the 14th Amendment "... the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State." which requires a distinction between citizens and non-citizens with regard to apportionment.
Are you a victim of a government school education? Your lack of reading comprehension skills seems to indicate you are.
JWK
”Just because we [the courts] do not think the legislators have acted wisely or responsibly does not give us the right to assume their duties or to substitute our judgment for theirs.” Hillis v. Department of Ecology, 131 Wash. 2d 373, 932 P.2d 139 (1997)
That is true but the purpose of the census is to find out how many people are in the country and where they are located. By putting extraneous questions about citizenship we know from census surveys that we will get poorer responses which means we will miss people that should be counted. If we put questions about religion, criminal convictions, etc, the counts will go down. This defeats the primary purpose of the census. Question like this should be put on surveys which are sent out by the census bureau, not the census.The purpose of the census and a constitutional requirement is that we count everyone, not citizens.Whatwhy do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?The question on the census will give you an inaccurate count..
Why do you want an inaccurate census count????
Tell us.
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
Is it not you, who is pimping for the 'right Trumpers' without no cause or purpose?why do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?The question on the census will give you an inaccurate count..
Why do you want an inaccurate census count????
Tell us.
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
the Census question does not identify documented immigrants from undocumented immigrants from those on Refugee status....
So, ONCE AGAIN:
What is the purpose?
We already know what the purpose to do such was from the Republican operativer. Hofeller, who planned the question to be put on to the census... Hofeller's partner in crime friend went to work for and did work for Secretary Wilbur Ross as an advisor. The exact wording used by Ross to justify the question was in Hofeller's 2017 notes on his computer that his daughter found after he died, and she turned them over to shed light on them.
Court records show that Mr. Neuman, a decades-long friend of Mr. Hofeller’s, later became an informal adviser on census issues to Mr. Ross, the commerce secretary. By that summer, a top aide to Mr. Ross was pressing the Justice Department to say that it required detailed data from a census citizenship question to better enforce the Voting Rights Act.
It was to primarily disenfranchise the citizen Hispanic voter, (in Texas to start) thru computerized data gerrymandering drawn from the census...that would be used in the new redistricting maps that are to be drawn from the 2020 census.
History of Hofeller: Dead Republican operative’s electronic records at the core of two major legal battles
Opponents of the Trump administration's plan to include a citizenship question on the 2020 U.S. census say records found on a hard drive in Hofeller's home unmask partisan intent, including language nearly identical to the Justice Department's stated justification for the question: aiding enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the rationale seemed contrived and sent the case back to a lower court in New York.
Hofeller's records also prompted a new court filing in North Carolina’s redistricting litigation, suggesting that Republicans lied about how long drawing new maps would take.
In Republican political circles, Hofeller earned near-legendary status as a behind-the-scenes number cruncher who used voter and election data to draw maps he believed would comply with ever-changing redistricting rules over the decades — and help his party.
Through the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and later a consulting firm, Hofeller said he had analyzed and drafted district plans in more than half the states. His resume included a role in more than 30 redistricting lawsuits, where he was usually defending a map that favored Republicans or finding fault with one that boosted Democrats.
In the late 2000s, he was involved in the so-called RedMap project, a full-throttled effort to win as many state legislative seats for the GOP in 2010 as possible. That class of lawmakers would control the formulation of new district boundaries for state and federal legislative seats, cementing GOP power for a decade.
The plan worked. As the tea party helped the GOP take control of the U.S. House of Representatives, the party also flipped control of 21 state legislative chambers. The resulting maps have helped keep the GOP in power even in some states where more votes are cast for Democrats.
"They were strategic in understanding the ramifications of redistricting. Tom understood that," said Tim Storey, a redistricting expert at the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), who knew Hofeller for years. "There was no Tom Hofeller on the Democratic side."
The strategy weakened the political power of African Americans and Democrats, making Hofeller's work reviled among opponents who claimed it ran afoul of the Constitution.
And regarding this census, here was Hofeller's and the administration's purpose of under representing legal Hispanic voters and increasing the value of white citizen voters.
Deceased G.O.P. Strategist’s Hard Drives Reveal New Details on the Census Citizenship Question
The documents cited in the Thursday court filing include an unpublished August 2015 analysis by Mr. Hofeller, who was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative news outlet financially backed by Paul Singer, a billionaire New York hedge fund manager and major Republican donor. Mr. Hofeller’s charge was to assess the impact of drawing political maps that were not based on a state’s total population — the current practice virtually everywhere in the nation — but on a slice of that population: American citizens of voting age.
At the time, the study’s sponsor was considering whether to finance a lawsuit by conservative legal advocates that argued that counting voting-age citizens was not merely acceptable, but required by the Constitution.
Mr. Hofeller’s exhaustive analysis of Texas state legislative districts concluded that such maps “would be advantageous to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites,” and would dilute the political power of the state’s Hispanics.
The reason, he wrote, was that the maps would exclude traditionally Democratic Hispanics and their children from the population count. That would force Democratic districts to expand to meet the Constitution’s one person, one vote requirement. In turn, that would translate into fewer districts in traditionally Democratic areas, and a new opportunity for Republican mapmakers to create even stronger gerrymanders.
The strategy carried a fatal flaw, however: The detailed citizenship data that was needed to draw the maps did not exist. The only existing tally of voting-age citizens, Mr. Hofeller's study stated, came from a statistical sample of the population largely used by the Justice Department to verify that the 1965 Voting Rights Act was ensuring the voting rights of minority groups.
“Without a question on citizenship being included on the 2020 Decennial Census questionnaire,” Mr. Hofeller wrote, “the use of citizen voting age population is functionally unworkable.”
Roughly 16 months later, as President-elect Trump prepared to take office, Mr. Hofeller urged Mr. Trump’s transition team to consider adding a citizenship question to the census, the transition official responsible for census issues, Mark Neuman, said last year in a deposition in the Manhattan census lawsuit.
The above is just gibberish and not related to this simple issue on counting citizens on the census which is important to help in many ways
The question does not preclude anyone from being counted. All they have to do is fill out the form.
"fighting corruption" appears nowhere in the SC's job description.Wrong. You didn't get the point of the OP. It doesn't matter what their motives are. It's not the Court's job to judge motives or wisdom behind any act of government.Republicans fucked themselves on this by using any excuse to justify the question and acting as if the idea of a deliberate under-count of the census never occurred to them. No one likes to be bullshitted to their face.
It is the Court's job to prevent the corruption of the Constitution. This was a attempt to corrupt the census. They are well within their rights to do so you corrupt bastard.
That is true but the purpose of the census is to find out how many people are in the country and where they are located. By putting extraneous questions about citizenship we know from census surveys that we will get poorer responses which means we will miss people that should be counted. If we put questions about religion, criminal convictions, etc, the counts will go down. This defeats the primary purpose of the census. Question like this should be put on surveys which are sent out by the census bureau, not the census.The purpose of the census and a constitutional requirement is that we count everyone, not citizens.Whatwhy do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
Is it not you, who is pimping for the 'right Trumpers' without no cause or purpose?why do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
the Census question does not identify documented immigrants from undocumented immigrants from those on Refugee status....
So, ONCE AGAIN:
What is the purpose?
We already know what the purpose to do such was from the Republican operativer. Hofeller, who planned the question to be put on to the census... Hofeller's partner in crime friend went to work for and did work for Secretary Wilbur Ross as an advisor. The exact wording used by Ross to justify the question was in Hofeller's 2017 notes on his computer that his daughter found after he died, and she turned them over to shed light on them.
Court records show that Mr. Neuman, a decades-long friend of Mr. Hofeller’s, later became an informal adviser on census issues to Mr. Ross, the commerce secretary. By that summer, a top aide to Mr. Ross was pressing the Justice Department to say that it required detailed data from a census citizenship question to better enforce the Voting Rights Act.
It was to primarily disenfranchise the citizen Hispanic voter, (in Texas to start) thru computerized data gerrymandering drawn from the census...that would be used in the new redistricting maps that are to be drawn from the 2020 census.
History of Hofeller: Dead Republican operative’s electronic records at the core of two major legal battles
Opponents of the Trump administration's plan to include a citizenship question on the 2020 U.S. census say records found on a hard drive in Hofeller's home unmask partisan intent, including language nearly identical to the Justice Department's stated justification for the question: aiding enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the rationale seemed contrived and sent the case back to a lower court in New York.
Hofeller's records also prompted a new court filing in North Carolina’s redistricting litigation, suggesting that Republicans lied about how long drawing new maps would take.
In Republican political circles, Hofeller earned near-legendary status as a behind-the-scenes number cruncher who used voter and election data to draw maps he believed would comply with ever-changing redistricting rules over the decades — and help his party.
Through the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and later a consulting firm, Hofeller said he had analyzed and drafted district plans in more than half the states. His resume included a role in more than 30 redistricting lawsuits, where he was usually defending a map that favored Republicans or finding fault with one that boosted Democrats.
In the late 2000s, he was involved in the so-called RedMap project, a full-throttled effort to win as many state legislative seats for the GOP in 2010 as possible. That class of lawmakers would control the formulation of new district boundaries for state and federal legislative seats, cementing GOP power for a decade.
The plan worked. As the tea party helped the GOP take control of the U.S. House of Representatives, the party also flipped control of 21 state legislative chambers. The resulting maps have helped keep the GOP in power even in some states where more votes are cast for Democrats.
"They were strategic in understanding the ramifications of redistricting. Tom understood that," said Tim Storey, a redistricting expert at the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), who knew Hofeller for years. "There was no Tom Hofeller on the Democratic side."
The strategy weakened the political power of African Americans and Democrats, making Hofeller's work reviled among opponents who claimed it ran afoul of the Constitution.
And regarding this census, here was Hofeller's and the administration's purpose of under representing legal Hispanic voters and increasing the value of white citizen voters.
Deceased G.O.P. Strategist’s Hard Drives Reveal New Details on the Census Citizenship Question
The documents cited in the Thursday court filing include an unpublished August 2015 analysis by Mr. Hofeller, who was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative news outlet financially backed by Paul Singer, a billionaire New York hedge fund manager and major Republican donor. Mr. Hofeller’s charge was to assess the impact of drawing political maps that were not based on a state’s total population — the current practice virtually everywhere in the nation — but on a slice of that population: American citizens of voting age.
At the time, the study’s sponsor was considering whether to finance a lawsuit by conservative legal advocates that argued that counting voting-age citizens was not merely acceptable, but required by the Constitution.
Mr. Hofeller’s exhaustive analysis of Texas state legislative districts concluded that such maps “would be advantageous to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites,” and would dilute the political power of the state’s Hispanics.
The reason, he wrote, was that the maps would exclude traditionally Democratic Hispanics and their children from the population count. That would force Democratic districts to expand to meet the Constitution’s one person, one vote requirement. In turn, that would translate into fewer districts in traditionally Democratic areas, and a new opportunity for Republican mapmakers to create even stronger gerrymanders.
The strategy carried a fatal flaw, however: The detailed citizenship data that was needed to draw the maps did not exist. The only existing tally of voting-age citizens, Mr. Hofeller's study stated, came from a statistical sample of the population largely used by the Justice Department to verify that the 1965 Voting Rights Act was ensuring the voting rights of minority groups.
“Without a question on citizenship being included on the 2020 Decennial Census questionnaire,” Mr. Hofeller wrote, “the use of citizen voting age population is functionally unworkable.”
Roughly 16 months later, as President-elect Trump prepared to take office, Mr. Hofeller urged Mr. Trump’s transition team to consider adding a citizenship question to the census, the transition official responsible for census issues, Mark Neuman, said last year in a deposition in the Manhattan census lawsuit.
The above is just gibberish and not related to this simple issue on counting citizens on the census which is important to help in many ways
The question does not preclude anyone from being counted. All they have to do is fill out the form.
No information gathered by the census will alter the number of representatives per state by merely adding the question of citizenship. All residents who respond will still be counted regardless of citizenship.Nonsense.It appears with all the noise about the question “Is this person a citizen of the United States?” we are overlooking Justice Roberts has usurped legislative power by second guessing a legitimate policy making decision.
In regard to this assumption of power Justice Stone reminds us that:
”The power of courts to declare a statute unconstitutional is subject to two guiding principles of decision which ought never to be absent from judicial consciousness. One is that courts are concerned only with the power to enact statutes, not with their wisdom. The other is that while unconstitutional exercise of power by the executive and legislative branches of the government is subject to judicial restraint, the only check upon our own exercise of power is our own sense of self-restraint. For the removal of unwise laws from the statute books appeal lies, not to the courts, but to the ballot and to the processes of democratic government.” U.S. v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1, 78-79 (1936)
Additionally, the court in Hillis v. Department of Ecology, 131 Wash. 2d 373, 932 P.2d 139 (1997) pointed out:
”Just because we [the courts] do not think the legislators have acted wisely or responsibly does not give us the right to assume their duties or to substitute our judgment for theirs.”
And, in ELDRED et al. v. ASHCROFT, ATTORNEY GENERAL (2003) the court unmistakably confirmed:
…..we are not at liberty to second-guess congressional determinations and policy judgments of this order, however debatable or arguably unwise they may be…The wisdom of Congress' action, however, is not within our province to second guess.
And finally, Justice Black, quite eloquently addressed the issue as follows:
"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges' views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice." – Justice Hugo L. Black (U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1886 - 1971) Source: Lecture, Columbia University, 1968
The bottom line is, Justice Obamacare-Roberts has repeatedly violate the most fundamental cannons and principles of our constitutionally limited system of government and the fundamental rules of constitutional construction by interfering with a legitimate question being replaced on our census form . . . “Is this person a citizen of the United States?”
JWK
Without a Fifth Column Media and Yellow Journalism [ourMSM], the crisis at our southern border would never have grown to what now amounts to an outright invasion and threatens the general welfare of the United States.
The decision has nothing to do with determining the constitutionality of an act of Congress.
.
Baloney. Congress delegated almost unlimited power to the Executive Office over the censes. Additionally, we are talking about a policy making decision, which is not within the courts assigned duty to second guess.
JWK
And you would be wrong. The Census is NOT the purview of the Executive branch. The numbers gathered are for the use of the Congress, in setting spending priorities, not the Executive branch.
The conduct and tabulation of census data is the purview of the executive branch. That data is used by every level of government for various purposes. But the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US.
.
When you said, "but the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US," which is the topic of this thread. If you don't want to answer, I have no problem accepting that as acknowledgement you agree the citizenship question does not impact the appropriation of representation.No information gathered by the census will alter the number of representatives per state by merely adding the question of citizenship. All residents who respond will still be counted regardless of citizenship.Nonsense.
The decision has nothing to do with determining the constitutionality of an act of Congress.
.
Baloney. Congress delegated almost unlimited power to the Executive Office over the censes. Additionally, we are talking about a policy making decision, which is not within the courts assigned duty to second guess.
JWK
And you would be wrong. The Census is NOT the purview of the Executive branch. The numbers gathered are for the use of the Congress, in setting spending priorities, not the Executive branch.
The conduct and tabulation of census data is the purview of the executive branch. That data is used by every level of government for various purposes. But the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US.
.
Where did I mention the citizenship question in the post you replied to?
.
When you said, "but the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US," which is the topic of this thread. If you don't want to answer, I have no problem accepting that as acknowledgement you agree the citizenship question does not impact the appropriation of representation.No information gathered by the census will alter the number of representatives per state by merely adding the question of citizenship. All residents who respond will still be counted regardless of citizenship.Baloney. Congress delegated almost unlimited power to the Executive Office over the censes. Additionally, we are talking about a policy making decision, which is not within the courts assigned duty to second guess.
JWK
And you would be wrong. The Census is NOT the purview of the Executive branch. The numbers gathered are for the use of the Congress, in setting spending priorities, not the Executive branch.
The conduct and tabulation of census data is the purview of the executive branch. That data is used by every level of government for various purposes. But the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US.
.
Where did I mention the citizenship question in the post you replied to?
.
The implications are that all U.S. citizens eligible to vote and non-U.S. citizens other than Indians not taxes are counted. Meaning asking folks if they're a U.S. citizen doesn't actually alter the count since U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens are already counted.When you said, "but the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US," which is the topic of this thread. If you don't want to answer, I have no problem accepting that as acknowledgement you agree the citizenship question does not impact the appropriation of representation.No information gathered by the census will alter the number of representatives per state by merely adding the question of citizenship. All residents who respond will still be counted regardless of citizenship.And you would be wrong. The Census is NOT the purview of the Executive branch. The numbers gathered are for the use of the Congress, in setting spending priorities, not the Executive branch.
The conduct and tabulation of census data is the purview of the executive branch. That data is used by every level of government for various purposes. But the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US.
.
Where did I mention the citizenship question in the post you replied to?
.
I guess you could take that view if you continue to ignore the implications of the 14th Amendment.
.
The implications are that all U.S. citizens eligible to vote and non-U.S. citizens other than Indians not taxes are counted. Meaning asking folks if they're a U.S. citizen doesn't actually alter the count since U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens are already counted.When you said, "but the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US," which is the topic of this thread. If you don't want to answer, I have no problem accepting that as acknowledgement you agree the citizenship question does not impact the appropriation of representation.No information gathered by the census will alter the number of representatives per state by merely adding the question of citizenship. All residents who respond will still be counted regardless of citizenship.The conduct and tabulation of census data is the purview of the executive branch. That data is used by every level of government for various purposes. But the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US.
.
Where did I mention the citizenship question in the post you replied to?
.
I guess you could take that view if you continue to ignore the implications of the 14th Amendment.
.
No, I don't ignore it. It refers to citizens who don't count towards appropriating representation. It doesn't mean only citizens can be counted.The implications are that all U.S. citizens eligible to vote and non-U.S. citizens other than Indians not taxes are counted. Meaning asking folks if they're a U.S. citizen doesn't actually alter the count since U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens are already counted.When you said, "but the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US," which is the topic of this thread. If you don't want to answer, I have no problem accepting that as acknowledgement you agree the citizenship question does not impact the appropriation of representation.No information gathered by the census will alter the number of representatives per state by merely adding the question of citizenship. All residents who respond will still be counted regardless of citizenship.
Where did I mention the citizenship question in the post you replied to?
.
I guess you could take that view if you continue to ignore the implications of the 14th Amendment.
.
What ever. The last sentence of section 2 refers to citizens. But you'll continue to ignore it, carry on commie.
.
No, I don't ignore it. It refers to citizens who don't count towards appropriating representation. It doesn't mean only citizens can be counted.The implications are that all U.S. citizens eligible to vote and non-U.S. citizens other than Indians not taxes are counted. Meaning asking folks if they're a U.S. citizen doesn't actually alter the count since U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens are already counted.When you said, "but the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US," which is the topic of this thread. If you don't want to answer, I have no problem accepting that as acknowledgement you agree the citizenship question does not impact the appropriation of representation.Where did I mention the citizenship question in the post you replied to?
.
I guess you could take that view if you continue to ignore the implications of the 14th Amendment.
.
What ever. The last sentence of section 2 refers to citizens. But you'll continue to ignore it, carry on commie.
.
You'll also note the first sentence includes Indians who are taxed -- many of whom were not U.S. citizens at the time that amendment was ratified. Proving beyond any rightard shadow of doubt that non-U.S. citizens are counted.
Holyfuckingshit!No, I don't ignore it. It refers to citizens who don't count towards appropriating representation. It doesn't mean only citizens can be counted.The implications are that all U.S. citizens eligible to vote and non-U.S. citizens other than Indians not taxes are counted. Meaning asking folks if they're a U.S. citizen doesn't actually alter the count since U.S. citizens and non-U.S. citizens are already counted.When you said, "but the primary purpose of the census is to determine the allocation of representatives throughout the US," which is the topic of this thread. If you don't want to answer, I have no problem accepting that as acknowledgement you agree the citizenship question does not impact the appropriation of representation.
I guess you could take that view if you continue to ignore the implications of the 14th Amendment.
.
What ever. The last sentence of section 2 refers to citizens. But you'll continue to ignore it, carry on commie.
.
You'll also note the first sentence includes Indians who are taxed -- many of whom were not U.S. citizens at the time that amendment was ratified. Proving beyond any rightard shadow of doubt that non-U.S. citizens are counted.
Yeah, it never mentioned the legality of faghadist marriage either, yet....................
.
It is important to have both counted... Citizens, to appropriately apportion monies and congressional representation, and non-citizens as to their location and distribution. Because this directly affects voters and their rights the question about citizenship is essential in the census.The purpose of the census and a constitutional requirement is that we count everyone, not citizens.Whatwhy do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?The question on the census will give you an inaccurate count..A correct census helps in many ways and an incorrect census harms in many ways and does not take much logic to understand this
The GDP scores will be faulty with incorrect counts
Health research and studies with patterns and the learning would be incorrect
Should be a world law that only citizens should be counted once and travelers could be counted many times
Justice Roberts has a severe problem of not wanting a nation and world to have prosperity
Why do you want an inaccurate census count????
Tell us.
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
Is it not you, who is pimping for the 'right Trumpers' without no cause or purpose?why do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?The question on the census will give you an inaccurate count..A correct census helps in many ways and an incorrect census harms in many ways and does not take much logic to understand this
The GDP scores will be faulty with incorrect counts
Health research and studies with patterns and the learning would be incorrect
Should be a world law that only citizens should be counted once and travelers could be counted many times
Justice Roberts has a severe problem of not wanting a nation and world to have prosperity
Why do you want an inaccurate census count????
Tell us.
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
the Census question does not identify documented immigrants from undocumented immigrants from those on Refugee status....
So, ONCE AGAIN:
What is the purpose?
We already know what the purpose to do such was from the Republican operativer. Hofeller, who planned the question to be put on to the census... Hofeller's partner in crime friend went to work for and did work for Secretary Wilbur Ross as an advisor. The exact wording used by Ross to justify the question was in Hofeller's 2017 notes on his computer that his daughter found after he died, and she turned them over to shed light on them.
Court records show that Mr. Neuman, a decades-long friend of Mr. Hofeller’s, later became an informal adviser on census issues to Mr. Ross, the commerce secretary. By that summer, a top aide to Mr. Ross was pressing the Justice Department to say that it required detailed data from a census citizenship question to better enforce the Voting Rights Act.
It was to primarily disenfranchise the citizen Hispanic voter, (in Texas to start) thru computerized data gerrymandering drawn from the census...that would be used in the new redistricting maps that are to be drawn from the 2020 census.
History of Hofeller: Dead Republican operative’s electronic records at the core of two major legal battles
Opponents of the Trump administration's plan to include a citizenship question on the 2020 U.S. census say records found on a hard drive in Hofeller's home unmask partisan intent, including language nearly identical to the Justice Department's stated justification for the question: aiding enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the rationale seemed contrived and sent the case back to a lower court in New York.
Hofeller's records also prompted a new court filing in North Carolina’s redistricting litigation, suggesting that Republicans lied about how long drawing new maps would take.
In Republican political circles, Hofeller earned near-legendary status as a behind-the-scenes number cruncher who used voter and election data to draw maps he believed would comply with ever-changing redistricting rules over the decades — and help his party.
Through the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and later a consulting firm, Hofeller said he had analyzed and drafted district plans in more than half the states. His resume included a role in more than 30 redistricting lawsuits, where he was usually defending a map that favored Republicans or finding fault with one that boosted Democrats.
In the late 2000s, he was involved in the so-called RedMap project, a full-throttled effort to win as many state legislative seats for the GOP in 2010 as possible. That class of lawmakers would control the formulation of new district boundaries for state and federal legislative seats, cementing GOP power for a decade.
The plan worked. As the tea party helped the GOP take control of the U.S. House of Representatives, the party also flipped control of 21 state legislative chambers. The resulting maps have helped keep the GOP in power even in some states where more votes are cast for Democrats.
"They were strategic in understanding the ramifications of redistricting. Tom understood that," said Tim Storey, a redistricting expert at the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), who knew Hofeller for years. "There was no Tom Hofeller on the Democratic side."
The strategy weakened the political power of African Americans and Democrats, making Hofeller's work reviled among opponents who claimed it ran afoul of the Constitution.
And regarding this census, here was Hofeller's and the administration's purpose of under representing legal Hispanic voters and increasing the value of white citizen voters.
Deceased G.O.P. Strategist’s Hard Drives Reveal New Details on the Census Citizenship Question
The documents cited in the Thursday court filing include an unpublished August 2015 analysis by Mr. Hofeller, who was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative news outlet financially backed by Paul Singer, a billionaire New York hedge fund manager and major Republican donor. Mr. Hofeller’s charge was to assess the impact of drawing political maps that were not based on a state’s total population — the current practice virtually everywhere in the nation — but on a slice of that population: American citizens of voting age.
At the time, the study’s sponsor was considering whether to finance a lawsuit by conservative legal advocates that argued that counting voting-age citizens was not merely acceptable, but required by the Constitution.
Mr. Hofeller’s exhaustive analysis of Texas state legislative districts concluded that such maps “would be advantageous to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites,” and would dilute the political power of the state’s Hispanics.
The reason, he wrote, was that the maps would exclude traditionally Democratic Hispanics and their children from the population count. That would force Democratic districts to expand to meet the Constitution’s one person, one vote requirement. In turn, that would translate into fewer districts in traditionally Democratic areas, and a new opportunity for Republican mapmakers to create even stronger gerrymanders.
The strategy carried a fatal flaw, however: The detailed citizenship data that was needed to draw the maps did not exist. The only existing tally of voting-age citizens, Mr. Hofeller's study stated, came from a statistical sample of the population largely used by the Justice Department to verify that the 1965 Voting Rights Act was ensuring the voting rights of minority groups.
“Without a question on citizenship being included on the 2020 Decennial Census questionnaire,” Mr. Hofeller wrote, “the use of citizen voting age population is functionally unworkable.”
Roughly 16 months later, as President-elect Trump prepared to take office, Mr. Hofeller urged Mr. Trump’s transition team to consider adding a citizenship question to the census, the transition official responsible for census issues, Mark Neuman, said last year in a deposition in the Manhattan census lawsuit.
The above is just gibberish and not related to this simple issue on counting citizens on the census which is important to help in many ways
And what does asking respondents if they're U.S. citizens when that does nothing to determine if they're illegal aliens?It is important to have both counted... Citizens, to appropriately apportion monies and congressional representation, and non-citizens as to their location and distribution. Because this directly affects voters and their rights the question about citizenship is essential in the census.The purpose of the census and a constitutional requirement is that we count everyone, not citizens.Whatwhy do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?The question on the census will give you an inaccurate count..
Why do you want an inaccurate census count????
Tell us.
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
Is it not you, who is pimping for the 'right Trumpers' without no cause or purpose?why do you not want to know how many who live here are legal or not?The question on the census will give you an inaccurate count..
Why do you want an inaccurate census count????
Tell us.
tell us...wait....
nevermind. just keep on being a pimp for the left but everyone knows your hookers are diseased.
the Census question does not identify documented immigrants from undocumented immigrants from those on Refugee status....
So, ONCE AGAIN:
What is the purpose?
We already know what the purpose to do such was from the Republican operativer. Hofeller, who planned the question to be put on to the census... Hofeller's partner in crime friend went to work for and did work for Secretary Wilbur Ross as an advisor. The exact wording used by Ross to justify the question was in Hofeller's 2017 notes on his computer that his daughter found after he died, and she turned them over to shed light on them.
Court records show that Mr. Neuman, a decades-long friend of Mr. Hofeller’s, later became an informal adviser on census issues to Mr. Ross, the commerce secretary. By that summer, a top aide to Mr. Ross was pressing the Justice Department to say that it required detailed data from a census citizenship question to better enforce the Voting Rights Act.
It was to primarily disenfranchise the citizen Hispanic voter, (in Texas to start) thru computerized data gerrymandering drawn from the census...that would be used in the new redistricting maps that are to be drawn from the 2020 census.
History of Hofeller: Dead Republican operative’s electronic records at the core of two major legal battles
Opponents of the Trump administration's plan to include a citizenship question on the 2020 U.S. census say records found on a hard drive in Hofeller's home unmask partisan intent, including language nearly identical to the Justice Department's stated justification for the question: aiding enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the rationale seemed contrived and sent the case back to a lower court in New York.
Hofeller's records also prompted a new court filing in North Carolina’s redistricting litigation, suggesting that Republicans lied about how long drawing new maps would take.
In Republican political circles, Hofeller earned near-legendary status as a behind-the-scenes number cruncher who used voter and election data to draw maps he believed would comply with ever-changing redistricting rules over the decades — and help his party.
Through the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and later a consulting firm, Hofeller said he had analyzed and drafted district plans in more than half the states. His resume included a role in more than 30 redistricting lawsuits, where he was usually defending a map that favored Republicans or finding fault with one that boosted Democrats.
In the late 2000s, he was involved in the so-called RedMap project, a full-throttled effort to win as many state legislative seats for the GOP in 2010 as possible. That class of lawmakers would control the formulation of new district boundaries for state and federal legislative seats, cementing GOP power for a decade.
The plan worked. As the tea party helped the GOP take control of the U.S. House of Representatives, the party also flipped control of 21 state legislative chambers. The resulting maps have helped keep the GOP in power even in some states where more votes are cast for Democrats.
"They were strategic in understanding the ramifications of redistricting. Tom understood that," said Tim Storey, a redistricting expert at the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), who knew Hofeller for years. "There was no Tom Hofeller on the Democratic side."
The strategy weakened the political power of African Americans and Democrats, making Hofeller's work reviled among opponents who claimed it ran afoul of the Constitution.
And regarding this census, here was Hofeller's and the administration's purpose of under representing legal Hispanic voters and increasing the value of white citizen voters.
Deceased G.O.P. Strategist’s Hard Drives Reveal New Details on the Census Citizenship Question
The documents cited in the Thursday court filing include an unpublished August 2015 analysis by Mr. Hofeller, who was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative news outlet financially backed by Paul Singer, a billionaire New York hedge fund manager and major Republican donor. Mr. Hofeller’s charge was to assess the impact of drawing political maps that were not based on a state’s total population — the current practice virtually everywhere in the nation — but on a slice of that population: American citizens of voting age.
At the time, the study’s sponsor was considering whether to finance a lawsuit by conservative legal advocates that argued that counting voting-age citizens was not merely acceptable, but required by the Constitution.
Mr. Hofeller’s exhaustive analysis of Texas state legislative districts concluded that such maps “would be advantageous to Republicans and non-Hispanic whites,” and would dilute the political power of the state’s Hispanics.
The reason, he wrote, was that the maps would exclude traditionally Democratic Hispanics and their children from the population count. That would force Democratic districts to expand to meet the Constitution’s one person, one vote requirement. In turn, that would translate into fewer districts in traditionally Democratic areas, and a new opportunity for Republican mapmakers to create even stronger gerrymanders.
The strategy carried a fatal flaw, however: The detailed citizenship data that was needed to draw the maps did not exist. The only existing tally of voting-age citizens, Mr. Hofeller's study stated, came from a statistical sample of the population largely used by the Justice Department to verify that the 1965 Voting Rights Act was ensuring the voting rights of minority groups.
“Without a question on citizenship being included on the 2020 Decennial Census questionnaire,” Mr. Hofeller wrote, “the use of citizen voting age population is functionally unworkable.”
Roughly 16 months later, as President-elect Trump prepared to take office, Mr. Hofeller urged Mr. Trump’s transition team to consider adding a citizenship question to the census, the transition official responsible for census issues, Mark Neuman, said last year in a deposition in the Manhattan census lawsuit.
The above is just gibberish and not related to this simple issue on counting citizens on the census which is important to help in many ways
When you consider that over 900,000 people in California are here illegally and are not citizens that number removes seats in congress and reroutes federal funds depriving states like Wyoming of representation and monies. This is disenfranchising legal US citizens who have the right and privilege to vote.
