world

Trump administration to ask Supreme Court to decide census dispute

11 Comments
By Andrew Chung and Lawrence Hurley

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2019.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

11 Comments
Login to comment

The plain meaning of the Constitution is that all people are to be counted, not just citizens. The fact that citizens is used elsewhere in the Constitution to limit the rights it enumerates tell us that the people who wrote the Constitution and Amendments meant to distinguish between people and citizens. Ergo, if they had only meant for citizens to be counted in the census, they would have used citizen instead of people.

If you support originalism, you have to be against the citizenship question.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The Constitution is clear that illegal immigrants aren’t supposed to be counted.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

The Constitution is clear that illegal immigrants aren’t supposed to be counted.

Is this meant as a serious rebuttal? You provided no support for your rebuttal, which means it fails completely.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

But there's no hurry on ending the Trump shutdown.

Interesting priorities.

I don't think this administration is capable of doing anything that isn't constitutionally questionable.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Why would they ask that question? The purpose it to count the number of bodies in the country.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Why? Personally, I would like to know and have a breakdown as to who is in the country.

But there's no hurry on ending the Trump shutdown.

I guess there’s no hurry to fund the wall....

Interesting priorities.

I don't think this administration is capable of doing anything that isn't constitutionally questionable.

Now you guys know how we felt all those dreaded 8 years

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

This is exhibit A as to why Dems support open borders and sanctuary cities. It’s all about political power. There is nothing un-Constitutional about asking if someone is a resident (legal or otherwise). In fact the question had been asked on Censuses in the past. It is a cynical and corrupt grab for power.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

In fact the question had been asked on Censuses in the past.

The last time a census included a citizenship question was 1950. It's hardly a recent thing, and considering some of the other things that were legal in 1950 but illegal now, and vice versa, I'd say it's a question that doesn't need to be brought back.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@CrazyJoe

But there's no hurry on ending the Trump shutdown.

I'm no fan of the administration or the shutdown, but these are pretty unrelated. There's no reason that one requires the other. There are many better arguments against this than "but the shutdown". Talk about how it's unnecessary for the requirements of a census and can undercut counting (as opposed to many other demographic questions which are unlikely, at this time, to cause people to underreport). The shutdown is not relevant to this.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is exhibit A as to why Dems support open borders

This is exhibit A into the Delusion of the right.

The Democrats have never supported open borders. Literally never.

Some extreme leftists most definitely have, but don't confuse the extremists with the party, we're not talking the Republicans here.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

There is nothing un-Constitutional about asking if someone is a resident (legal or otherwise).

It's never been legally challenged until now, so the answer whether or not it is unconstitutional does not yet exist.

In fact the question had been asked on Censuses in the past.

That doesn't mean it's constitutional. See above point.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites