Trump on track for Supreme Court Victory on Census Citizenship Question

[LouderVol]

The U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Tuesday appeared inclined to hand President Donald Trump a victory on his administration’s plan to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census, a move opponents call a Republican effort to deter immigrants from taking part.

During arguments in the closely watched case, conservative justices rallied in defense of the administration’s stated justification for using the citizenship question in the decennial population count, while their liberal counterparts remained skeptical.

The court has a 5-4 conservative majority. Among the conservative justices indicating support toward the administration’s stance were Trump’s two appointees, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch, as well as Chief Justice John Roberts, considered the court’s pivotal vote.

Trump on track for Supreme Court victory on census citizenship question

To the argument, why should non citizens count towards Congressional seats?

Also why the fear mongering, this isnt going to chase away legal citizens. They have nothing to fear.

I do agree individual census results should not be turned over to the police. But the census is literally a public information gathering tool. So I dont see how to keep it out of their hands. Just as long as the census workers dont become enforcers of the law outside of censusing.

 

[AM64]

So a just born child automatically bears the sins of their father?

There's a reason for the term "anchor baby". The kid's US citizenship is used as the hook to gain citizenship for the parents. True, the baby had no say in where, when, how it was born. The parents are being rewarded for having the baby on US soil ... they committed the illegal act. If you awarded the kid citizenship with an asterisk meaning no family could ever qualify for US citizenship, then, yeah, the baby would be a complete innocent instead of a pawn. As long as the kid is a pawn, then the sins of the father apply.

 

[hog88]

So is anyone who is opposed to teh question of citizenship on the census going to explain why?

 

[volinbham]

The Left claims to be the party of facts - why don't they want to collect this data?

 

[NorthDallas40]

So a just born child automatically bears the sins of their father?

Apparently so according to the left.

Reparations, income handouts, guaranteed jobs: Dems tilt hard left

 

[hog88]

It will be used as a tool to round up and prosecute (that's expensive too). As such it will never adequately reflect a true count of bodies in the country. Without a true count you can't provide proper services that will be needed

The question to be included on the census is only about US citizenship, not legal residency. So no it won't.

.

 

[utvolpj]

Apparently so according to the left.

Reparations, income handouts, guaranteed jobs: Dems tilt hard left

So this is now a thread full of lefties?

 

[volinbham]

So is anyone who is opposed to teh question of citizenship on the census going to explain why?

Even the argument that it will result in an undercount of the # of people here (legal and illegal) doesn't hold water since the Census began using sampling and sampling techniques to fill in gaps. Once a sufficient amount of incidences are accumulated then the larger number can be extrapolated and adjusted based on likelihood of participating in the first place. Turns out one of the bigger groups of people who do not participate is people who don't trust the government. Once a proportion can be estimated their lack of participation can be accounted for.

 

[utvolpj]

.

Will need to see the question. I have doubts it won't be phrased in a way to create propaganda

 

[82_VOL_83]

So a just born child automatically bears the sins of their father?

If you call being in a country undocumented then yes. If no, then you decide.

 

[hog88]

Will need to see the question. I have doubts it won't be phrased in a way to create propaganda

You could have just said "Because Trump" and saved some bandwidth.

 

[82_VOL_83]

Actually you've switched from citizen to just documented. Stay consistent and posts make more sense

Please explain what you mean by illegal. I had to assume you meant they were here undocumented. Be precise and your posts will make more sense.

 

[volinbham]

The argument from the critics is that the administration is doing this so as to cause some portion of illegal alien recipients not to answer, thereby reducing the resources delivered to areas in which they live and reduce representation of such areas in Congress.

Many folks here seem to think that is a perfectly fine rationale for doing so.

The Census began using sampling. It compensates for the under counting. The critics are wrong if they think this is what it will accomplish.

On the other hand knowing this information should make for more informed decision making.

 

[AM64]

Even the argument that it will result in an undercount of the # of people here (legal and illegal) doesn't hold water since the Census began using sampling and sampling techniques to fill in gaps. Once a sufficient amount of incidences are accumulated then the larger number can be extrapolated and adjusted based on likelihood of participating in the first place. Turns out one of the bigger groups of people who do not participate is people who don't trust the government. Once a proportion can be estimated their lack of participation can be accounted for.

Maybe the solution is to award 3/5th s of the total count to sanctuary cities. Libs like to bandy the 3/5th thing around, so let them have it.

 

[NorthDallas40]

So this is now a thread full of lefties?

What is it with you and the non sequitors today. You asked a question relating to “sins of the fathers” and I provided a link to a discussion that shows the left indeed is pushing that exact rhetoric. Which by the way is unconstitutional also. I think it’s the fifth amendment?

 

[utvolpj]

Please explain what you mean by illegal. I had to assume you meant they were here undocumented. Be precise and your posts will make more sense.

I have been. You stated

. If and when they become citizens, they can get a new SS Card that would allow them access to all benefits and tax burdens that a 1st class Citizen would get.

Yet ignore a large number who already have these yet aren't citizens. You're now rewriting laws in order to exclude even more. Is that your desire to exclude those who have already done it the right way (seems to be a common phrase)?

 

[82_VOL_83]

I have been. You stated


Yet ignore a large number who already have these yet aren't citizens. You're now rewriting laws in order to exclude even more. Is that your desire to exclude those who have already done it the right way (seems to be a common phrase)?

If they have done it the right way then they aren't illegal. I feel like I am talking to my wife. Jesus pete, just say what you mean and stop being a mealy mouth.

 

[utvolpj]

If they have done it the right way then they aren't illegal. I feel like I am talking to my wife. Jesus pete, just say what you mean and stop being a mealy mouth.

They aren't citizens either which was a key point in your post (used it twice). There are more than 2 statuses

 

[82_VOL_83]

They aren't citizens either which was a key point in your post. There are more than 2 statuses

You indeed have a comprehension issue. This started when you whined about wanting to get rid of the illegal moniker. I gave you an answer. You then started moving the goalposts (normal for you). Just make a point instead of dancing around something.

 

[82_VOL_83]

They aren't citizens either which was a key point in your post (used it twice). There are more than 2 statuses

I said 2nd class citizen as a way to document illegals. After that you just wanted to piss and moan. Context for the win.

 

[LouderVol]

There's a reason for the term "anchor baby". The kid's US citizenship is used as the hook to gain citizenship for the parents. True, the baby had no say in where, when, how it was born. The parents are being rewarded for having the baby on US soil ... they committed the illegal act. If you awarded the kid citizenship with an asterisk meaning no family could ever qualify for US citizenship, then, yeah, the baby would be a complete innocent instead of a pawn. As long as the kid is a pawn, then the sins of the father apply.

are you against anchor husbands? all them military boys with SE Asian wives?

 

[LouderVol]

They aren't citizens either which was a key point in your post (used it twice). There are more than 2 statuses

and the census will only ask a yes no question. are you a citizen?
it doesnt/wont ask if you are here illegally.

 

[azVolFan]

So more govt programs to raise more kids? Where have all the small govt peeps gone?

There's plenty of good people wanting to adopt.

 

[azVolFan]

The Left claims to be the party of facts - why don't they want to collect this data?

When the facts suit them they like them, the rest of the time facts are part of the white male dominance hierarchy.

 

[AM64]

are you against anchor husbands? all them military boys with SE Asian wives?

Not as long as they are legitimate and not just a ruse to gain citizenship. That is a recognized legal path toward citizenship, just like many others. It's not at all the same as jumping a border. We, just as other countries do, have legitimate paths to immigration; use them and obey the process, and I don't think you'll find those of us against illegal aliens complaining.