Trump on track for Supreme Court Victory on Census Citizenship Question

#426
#426
BowlBrother85 said:
Practically speaking, it just doesn't work that way because the illegal aliens will choose not to respond to the census with that question on there... and that is precisely what the Trump administration wants. Roberts threw the BS flag on Ross for his "protecting the Voting Rights Act" nonsense. As I mentioned earlier, however, this is not a critical matter because illegal aliens tend to live in places which are already heavily populated. The vast majority of illegals live in these 6 states:

1) California (#1 most populated)
2) Texas (#2 most populated)
3) New York (#3 most populated)
4) Florida (#4 most populated)
5) Arizona (#14 most populated)
6) New Mexico (#37 most populated)

They either go where the jobs are or they stay close to their port of entry. Even without including illegal aliens, the dispersion of federal funding would not be significantly impacted; neither would the allotment of seats in the House of Representative where California, Texas, New York and Florida are already 1, 2, 3 and 4 in terms of number of seats. Trump has not proven why this is such a "very critical matter" - in his words.
Click to expand...

Look at Minnesota and Michigan. There’s more than one problem with immigration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#428
#428
BigOrangeD said:
My guess is that Trump trying to delay the census may not work out.

Click to expand...



Well you know Trump. He took an oath to uphold the constitution, and he does whenever it suits him. His minions are OK with it now but it will likely come back to bite them in the azz some day.
 
#429
#429
BowlBrother85 said:
April 1st.... that sounds like a long time away, but in the context of this discussion - it's not. Now, aside from the fact that it's something that the Trump administration is pushing for, can any conservatives explain why that question is so important? The purpose of the census is to collect statistical data about U.S. citizens to determine the appropriate divisions of house seats and to provide a basis for apportioning federal taxes and funding among states. The goal should simply be to obtain as accurate a head count as possible.
Click to expand...
I actually heard July 1st and October 1st. Seems to be confusion on this.
 
#430
#430
In a way I guess Trump loves this. He can go around and promote to the base that he is trying to keep the brown people from getting your money through government programs but the Dems are blocking me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128
#431
#431
lawgator1 said:
Reagan tried a similar thing and Saturday Night Live did a skit. Been a long time but the joke was, after asking if the respondent was a citizen, there was a follow up question, "If someone were looking for you, where would you hide?"

Point is, the entire Court saw through the charade of reasons offered by the Trump administration given the mass of evidence that the real reasoning was to discriminate. So sure, it gets sent back, and the department can try to make its internal reasoning match what it publicly claims. But the other side will be entitled to discovery, to take depositions, to quiz the decision makers on the real reasons for it. And then that goes back to the lower courts. It does not go back to the Supreme Court.

The process would take several years, at least.

The Court has called the Trump administration a liar on this subject. No way the administration goes back only to be embarrassed again.

Its over.
Click to expand...
Not going to take years.


On the flipside the states legislature can still draw up districts it sounds like.
 
#433
#433
lawgator1 said:
Trump administration already told the Supreme Court it had to be decided by end of this month so time to print. If they retreat from that now, it will just confirm the fact that it's a political gimmick.
Click to expand...
The Government already has non-citizens addresses.
 
#434
#434
lawgator1 said:
In a way I guess Trump loves this. He can go around and promote to the base that he is trying to keep the brown people from getting your money through government programs but the Dems are blocking me.
Click to expand...
No doubt this will enter the stump speech at his next ramblin' rally. It will help him among his supporters, they are already getting feisty in the thread.
 
#435
#435
Orange_Vol1321 said:
I actually heard July 1st and October 1st. Seems to be confusion on this.
Click to expand...
Per Reuters.com, Census Bureau officials say that April 1, 2020 is the deadline for the Census. The Census Bureau had said that it must begin printing forms by June 30, 2019 - that is this coming Sunday.
 
#436
#436
zeppelin128 said:
No doubt this will enter the stump speech at his next ramblin' rally. It will help him among his supporters, they are already getting feisty in the thread.
Click to expand...
It's ridiculous, they can't even explain why this matter is so important. The citizenship question hasn't been on the Census form since 1950 but this time around, we can't live without it? That is absurd. They wouldn't care about this if Trump wasn't pushing it so hard. It's just a silly game, and they want Trump to "win".
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128
#437
#437
BowlBrother85 said:
It's ridiculous, they can't even explain why this matter is so important. The citizenship question hasn't been on the Census form since 1950 but this time around, we can't live without it? That is absurd. They wouldn't care about this if Trump wasn't pushing it so hard. It's just a silly game, and they want Trump to "win".
Click to expand...
It is just because Trump wants the question on the Census. That is it. Red Hats gonna Red Hat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#439
#439
BowlBrother85 said:
The census is mandated under Article One, Section Two of the U.S. Constitution, which directs that a census take place every ten years. A delay via executive action would be unprecedented and likely considered unconstitutional. This is Trump pouting and when he is at his worst.
Click to expand...
The right to bear arms shall not be infringed is also in the Constituion. It's so important that it was the 2nd Amendment to it but lefties don't care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#445
#445
BigOrangeD said:
Me too but I'm also Ok with the 2nd Amendment where we all can bear arms. Period.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but everyone can't. And try to go to a political debate with your arms and see what the 2nd Amendment gets you. So that period should be an asterisk.
 
#446
#446
85SugarVol said:
You don’t think private citizens should have firearms?
Click to expand...


I did not say that.

I think the CONSTITUTIONAL right is about federalism in the 18th century. Each state maintaining its independence from the Union of worst came to worst. That is the context and the meaning of the CONSTITUTIONAL right.

I do think private citizens can own firearms with reasonable regulation. But that includes licensure, insurance, and security measures.
 
#448
#448
lawgator1 said:
I did not say that.

I think the CONSTITUTIONAL right is about federalism in the 18th century. Each state maintaining its independence from the Union of worst came to worst. That is the context and the meaning of the CONSTITUTIONAL right.

I do think private citizens can own firearms with reasonable regulation. But that includes licensure, insurance, and security measures.
Click to expand...

In your opinion. The only insurance I would need is homeowners in case someone broke in and stole it and it needed replaced.
 
#449
#449
lawgator1 said:
I did not say that.

I think the CONSTITUTIONAL right is about federalism in the 18th century. Each state maintaining its independence from the Union of worst came to worst. That is the context and the meaning of the CONSTITUTIONAL right.

I do think private citizens can own firearms with reasonable regulation. But that includes licensure, insurance, and security measures.
Click to expand...
That's not reasonable.

The government does not need to know what I own nor dictate what exactly how much and what type of security measures I may take.

The government needs to get out of my home. My home, my decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, SpaceCoastVol and Pepe_Silvia
#450
#450
lawgator1 said:
I did not say that.

I think the CONSTITUTIONAL right is about federalism in the 18th century. Each state maintaining its independence from the Union of worst came to worst. That is the context and the meaning of the CONSTITUTIONAL right.

I do think private citizens can own firearms with reasonable regulation. But that includes licensure, insurance, and security measures.
Click to expand...

How would you go about putting that into effect? Do you think tens of millions of gun owners are going to step forward to buy the licenses for the guns they already own?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top