Justice Roberts second guesses policy making decision on census, violates separation of powers

[Flopper]

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.

Nobody said anything never occurred to them.

The point you ignore is that it's a legitimate question.

Why is it a legitimate question? It will have no effect on representation in congress nor will it have any effect on the allocation of federal funds.

Anything other than the head count is only for statistical purposes. Since's it's very unlikely that non-citizens, either documented or undocumented are going to answer the question, the value of the data is certainly questionable.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-966/81777/20190125163140500_2019-01-25 Commerce CBJ petn.pdf

 

[bodecea]

All states have poor people. Do you really want to compare poverty rates in red vs blue states? You really don't.

I will destroy you..


You don't comprehend buying power.

.

You couldn't destroy anything except a golden corral buffet.

Sounds good you buying?

Hell no. That place is disgusting.

How about chic fil A?

Certainly figures.....donnie's deplorables love them some greasy junk food.

 

[Flopper]

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.

In overturning a near-unanimous act of Congress, Roberts and the USSC invalidated provisions of the VRA because he said Congress used old data. That's what activist judges do.

The Supreme Court did not overturn anything. They simple refused to lift a court order by 2nd Circuit that stop the Secretary of Commerce from adding the citizenship question.

 

[bodecea]

I think a lot of people only believe that when an area is appropriated more money depending on the population, that the funds are all for social welfare programs, when in fact a lot of that appropriated money goes for projects that are for the well-being of the community. For example the number of first responders and the equipment funds they need doesn't change based on only U.S. citizens, they need to be able to handle the entire population of their community. If there is an emergency they don't ask if the person calling for help is an illegal immigrant or not, and then not show up to put out the fire or come to try and save their life... they do it for ANY member in their community and they need to have the funding and needs to handle those total numbers.

Trump and his cronies only care about trying to take away members of the House of Representatives from large Democrat states, which then will also allow redistricting under his watch that they can try to Gerrymander into their back pocket.

You put your finger on EXACTLY what CRCs want to see happen....first responders, hospitals, etc. to NOT help anyone who isn't a citizen.

 

[Flopper]

No it isn't. It's designed to skew the results. The mission of the census is to be as accurate as possible and totally non-partisan. There is no way the question would yield an accurate result so why have it? The answer is obvious. Republicans want an under-count in immigrant communities for when districts are redrawn and when federal money gets spent.

BS.

It's a necessary question. The information directly affects the allocation of tax $s.

Your argument suggests the Federal Government should assist lawbreakers by hiding illegal activity.

The only way it can effect tax dollars is causing people to not respond to the census because allocation of funds is based on the total number of people within each state regardless of citizenship. For example, people that are counted include foreign tourists, people with work permits, college students with student visas, inmates in prisons and mental institutions even people held in ICE detention camps. Everybody counts.

 

[MAGAman]

Why is it a legitimate question? It will have no effect on representation in congress nor will it have any effect on the allocation of federal funds.

Anything other than the head count is only for statistical purposes. Since's it's very unlikely that non-citizens, either documented or undocumented are going to answer the question, the value of the data is certainly questionable.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-966/81777/20190125163140500_2019-01-25 Commerce CBJ petn.pdf

Democrats are OK when they ask you how many toilets you have, but you're upset when the US Census asks how many US Citizens are in the country?

Really?

 

[Flopper]

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.

Nobody said anything never occurred to them.

The point you ignore is that it's a legitimate question.

Well it might be a legitimate question but the potential for abuse of the answers means that it should not be asked. The purpose of the census is to count the numbers and ages of people living in the United States for the purpose of programs and representation. Anything that might affect the accuracy of the account is basically screwing with the entire reason for doing the count in the first place.

Since the census is done by residence, not by individual if a census form is not received for the residence, no one at that residency will be counted.

The census bureau sends out many surveys other than the census asking questions about employment, race, citizenship, income, etc. Any time they put a question about citizenship, they get less responses. Families that contain any non-citizens, legal or illegal responds poorly.

Although republicans believe putting a question like this on the ballot will change the allocation of House seats in their favor, that is not necessarily true. There are a number of House seats held by republicans in which a small lost in the number of people being reported in the census can cause the lost of their seat. In other words, a lower count can effect both republicans and democrats.

 

[Flopper]

Why is it a legitimate question? It will have no effect on representation in congress nor will it have any effect on the allocation of federal funds.

Anything other than the head count is only for statistical purposes. Since's it's very unlikely that non-citizens, either documented or undocumented are going to answer the question, the value of the data is certainly questionable.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-966/81777/20190125163140500_2019-01-25 Commerce CBJ petn.pdf

Democrats are OK when they ask you how many toilets you have, but you're upset when the US Census asks how many US Citizens are in the country?

Really?

Asking a family how many toilets they have is not going to effect the response to the census. Asking about citizenship will.

 

[MAGAman]

Asking a family how many toilets they have is not going to effect the response to the census. Asking about citizenship will.

Government functions should not be curtailed for the expressed purpose of supporting criminal behavior.

We're a country of laws, not lawlessness.

 

[Flopper]

Asking a family how many toilets they have is not going to effect the response to the census. Asking about citizenship will.

Government functions should not be curtailed for the expressed purpose of supporting criminal behavior.

We're a country of laws, not lawlessness.

Nice reply but it is totally irrelevant to my post.

 

[MAGAman]

Nice reply but it is totally irrelevant to my post.

Of course it's relevant... Misspelled, but relevant.

You suggest that an official government function should be limited because it might result in criminals either falsifying official documents or ignoring those documents because they don't wish to be caught committing a crime.

 

[iceberg]

My only real problem with the ruling is that Roberts stated that it might be legal for other reasons, just not the one given. It is legal or not. The reason should not matter.

The Administrative Procedure Act says the reason does matter, and sets forth criteria for establishing reasons, asking for comment from potentially-aggrieved parties, etc. Roberts said using a phony pretext doesn't comply with the Act.

If the Admin had been honest from the start (that's a pretty good one, isn't it?), it would likely not have run afoul of the USSC. It compounded the error by insisting time was of the essence - to allow for printing of the forms. After the decision went against the Admin, Trump decided timing was no longer relevant. Trump can't keep a story straight for five minutes.

funny.

y'all can't give him credit for a thing; finding fault in everything he does for your own benefit.

kinda fucked up actually.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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.

Nobody said anything never occurred to them.

The point you ignore is that it's a legitimate question.

Well it might be a legitimate question but the potential for abuse of the answers means that it should not be asked. The purpose of the census is to count the numbers and ages of people living in the United States for the purpose of programs and representation. Anything that might affect the accuracy of the account is basically screwing with the entire reason for doing the count in the first place.

Since the census is done by residence, not by individual if a census form is not received for the residence, no one at that residency will be counted.

The census bureau sends out many surveys other than the census asking questions about employment, race, citizenship, income, etc. Any time they put a question about citizenship, they get less responses. Families that contain any non-citizens, legal or illegal responds poorly.

Although republicans believe putting a question like this on the ballot will change the allocation of House seats in their favor, that is not necessarily true. There are a number of House seats held by republicans in which a small lost in the number of people being reported in the census can cause the lost of their seat. In other words, a lower count can effect both republicans and democrats.

Republicans don’t care what is or isn’t true, or what the facts are.

 

[skye]

Roberts has been compromised

SHAME ON HIM

 

[MAGAman]

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.

Nobody said anything never occurred to them.

The point you ignore is that it's a legitimate question.

Well it might be a legitimate question but the potential for abuse of the answers means that it should not be asked. The purpose of the census is to count the numbers and ages of people living in the United States for the purpose of programs and representation. Anything that might affect the accuracy of the account is basically screwing with the entire reason for doing the count in the first place.

Since the census is done by residence, not by individual if a census form is not received for the residence, no one at that residency will be counted.

The census bureau sends out many surveys other than the census asking questions about employment, race, citizenship, income, etc. Any time they put a question about citizenship, they get less responses. Families that contain any non-citizens, legal or illegal responds poorly.

Although republicans believe putting a question like this on the ballot will change the allocation of House seats in their favor, that is not necessarily true. There are a number of House seats held by republicans in which a small lost in the number of people being reported in the census can cause the lost of their seat. In other words, a lower count can effect both republicans and democrats.

Republicans don’t care what is or isn’t true, or what the facts are.

Troll much?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

‘The Census Bureau’s November presentation quoted one researcher: “The politics have changed everything recently.” Immigrants — not just unauthorized immigrants but some types of legal immigrants as well — are highly anxious about their security under Trump and leery of interacting with any government officials as a result. And if US-born Latinos were skeptical of the government in 2010, they are likely to be even more skeptical now.’

The Supreme Court’s census ruling, explained

Yet another disastrous consequence of Trump’s reckless, irresponsible immigration policy.

 

[Dragonlady]

Roberts has been compromised

SHAME ON HIM

Roberts did his job properly and stopped executive overreach.

Trump lied to the Court. Shame on Trump for lying to the Court and trying to subvert democracy. And shame on you for supporting such abuses.

 

[skye]

Roberts has been compromised

SHAME ON HIM

Roberts did his job properly and stopped executive overreach.

Trump lied to the Court. Shame on Trump for lying to the Court and trying to subvert democracy. And shame on you for supporting such abuses.

^^^

TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome)

manifests itself in so many ways....

like in you, Dragonlady.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

The census is for the number of citizens NOT the number of non citizens who are here for any number of reasons and are citizens of other nations

Democrats nothing but trained liars saying the same thing

 

[Flopper]

Nice reply but it is totally irrelevant to my post.

Of course it's relevant... Misspelled, but relevant.

You suggest that an official government function should be limited because it might result in criminals either falsifying official documents or ignoring those documents because they don't wish to be caught committing a crime.

First of all, the purpose of census is to count the number of people who reside in each state. That includes everyone, citizens, legal and illegal aliens, students here on student visas, people with work visas, people on vacations from other countries, criminals in institutions, the homeless, residents temporarily in other locations, even people in ICE detention camps. If they are human and in the US, they are to be counted. That is what the census statues require as well as the Constitution. Any other questions asked are for statistical purposes.

Second, a census is constructed such that it will not discourage people from responding which would be contrary to the purpose of census. The purpose of the census is to count every one in each state. That is why the census bureau constructs a very simple non-threatening document that is likely to get most responses.

The census bureau does a number of surveys each year asking questions on many subject. Any time questions are asked about citizenship, response are low. Therefore to get the maximum number of responses, we do not ask questions about citizenship. Citizenship questions should be asked on surveys, not the census.