MILFHUNTER#518 Posted January 15, 2019 Share Posted January 15, 2019 Link Below. A federal judge in New York blocked the Trump administration Tuesday from adding a question about citizenship to the 2020 United States Census. U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman said that while a citizenship question is constitutional, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross failed to follow the correct procedure to include it in the forthcoming census. “Secretary Ross’s decision to add a citizenship question in the 2020 census — even if it did not violate the Constitution itself — was unlawful for a multitude of independent reasons and must be set aside,” Furman wrote in his 277-page opinion. “To conclude otherwise and let Secretary Ross’s decision stand would undermine the proposition — central to the rule of law — that ours is a government of laws, not of men.” The question which Ross sought to add reads: “Is this person a citizen of the United States?” A question of such nature has not appeared on the census since 1950. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/01/15/judge-orders-removal-citizenship-question-census/ Of course, this Judge was appointed by Obama in 2011 and his brother worked in the Obama administration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_M._Furman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted February 10, 2019 Share Posted February 10, 2019 Judge declines to block citizenship question from the 2020 census on privacy grounds A federal judge ruled late Friday she is unconvinced of an immediate need to block a citizenship question from the 2020 census over privacy concerns. US District Judge Dabney Friedrich declined to issue a preliminary injunction requested by a privacy and civil liberties nonprofit group, the Electronic Privacy Information Center. </snip> 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted February 10, 2019 Share Posted February 10, 2019 ? shocked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 15, 2019 Share Posted February 15, 2019 The Supreme Court just granted cert. in the case about adding a question about citizenship to the 2020 census. Robert Barnes reports at WaPo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 A 277 page opinion? Good grief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 2 minutes ago, KD in CA said: A 277 page opinion? Good grief. Must have been written by @OCinBuffalo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 47 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Must have been written by @OCinBuffalo. Did it have a lot of emojis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grinreaper Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 1 minute ago, KRC said: Did it have a lot of emojis? No, but the judge referred to himself 1067 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 17 minutes ago, grinreaper said: No, but the judge referred to himself 1067 times. 782 of those self-references were claims that the judge owned DC Tom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 16, 2019 Share Posted February 16, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 On 2/16/2019 at 12:42 PM, Koko78 said: 782 of those self-references were claims that the judge owned DC Tom. Please. I have owned Tom, as a wholly owned subsidiary, in so many threads, and you know know this. The simple fact is the kid needs to wait until the thought leaders speak, and then find fault. Doubt me? I came here to start 2 new threads...and we shall see exactly what he contributes: substantively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Dude Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 .....does anybody know who started censuses and what exactly their purpose was? Answer, the Romans. Other answer, to determine citizenship. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 21 minutes ago, The_Dude said: .....does anybody know who started censuses and what exactly their purpose was? Answer, the Romans. Other answer, to determine citizenship. Those Romans could do anything: https://www.getroman.com/?campaign=TM-GetRoman&medium=cpc&msclkid=59d3dbeeba2414a8f78e87657f67f5c2&ro_a={creative}&ro_c=267633122&ro_ch=cpc&ro_con=0&ro_d=c&ro_g=1142393070213077&ro_n=o&ro_p=bing&ro_t=kwd-71399973954074%3Aloc-4116&source=bing 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 FTA: The federal government appealed the rulings, which led them to the Supreme Court. The government’s argument in front of the justices took place at the end of March, but the ruling should come out at the end of June Insiders claimed that “the case is likely to go in favor of the administration.” From Bloomberg: Key U.S. Supreme Court justices seemed inclined to let the Trump administration add a question about citizenship to the 2020 census in a clash that will shape the allocation of congressional seats and federal dollars. In an 80-minute argument Tuesday that was both technical and combative, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh directed almost all their questions to the lawyers challenging the decision to ask about citizenship. Kavanaugh said Congress gave the Commerce secretary “huge discretion” to decide what to ask on the census. The Democrats forget that “a citizenship question has appeared in some form or another on censuses throughout our history.” President Barack Obama removed these type of questions in 2010. Ken Paxton also noted in his op-ed at The Hill: It is worth noting that the citizenship question does not ask about a person’s legal status; it merely asks about citizenship status and thus has nothing whatsoever to do with immigration enforcement. In fact, federal law prevents census data from being used for anything other than statistical analysis. That is the law and there is no evidence any agency intends to violate it. But Orange Man Bad. https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/trump-invokes-executive-privilege-over-census-documents-sought-by-oversight-committee/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 9 minutes ago, B-Man said: It is worth noting that the citizenship question does not ask about a person’s legal status; it merely asks about citizenship status and thus has nothing whatsoever to do with immigration enforcement. In fact, federal law prevents census data from being used for anything other than statistical analysis. That is the law and there is no evidence any agency intends to violate it. But Orange Man Bad. https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/06/trump-invokes-executive-privilege-over-census-documents-sought-by-oversight-committee/ Bah, when has the truth ever mattered to the left when there's histrionics to be had? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 The 14th Amendment seems to imply that the Federal government is required to have a count of citizens within each state. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 On 2/16/2019 at 12:24 PM, grinreaper said: No, but the judge referred to himself 1067 times. Obama appointee? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 17 minutes ago, row_33 said: Obama appointee? OC got a judgeship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 17 hours ago, B-Man said: It is worth noting that the citizenship question does not ask about a person’s legal status; it merely asks about citizenship status and thus has nothing whatsoever to do with immigration enforcement. In fact, federal law prevents census data from being used for anything other than statistical analysis. That is the law and there is no evidence any agency intends to violate it. Was this ever in question? Census forms are anonymized. You could use the data for deportation if you wanted...but you'd have to do the matching across seven different databases just to generate the court filings for the detainment orders that would never be enforced. It'd be a hell of a lot of work for no purpose. It'd be far easier to just deport DACA filers for being here illegally. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted June 13, 2019 Share Posted June 13, 2019 18 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said: The 14th Amendment seems to imply that the Federal government is required to have a count of citizens within each state. well... they don't like it so they think it should be overturned, BAM!!, just like that.... 21 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Was this ever in question? Census forms are anonymized. You could use the data for deportation if you wanted...but you'd have to do the matching across seven different databases just to generate the court filings for the detainment orders that would never be enforced. It'd be a hell of a lot of work for no purpose. It'd be far easier to just deport DACA filers for being here illegally. i worked census for a few summer jobs, and people HATE!!!!! the concept and filling out the form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts