Supreme Court tosses citizenship question from 2020 census forms, a victory for Democratic sta

[euphemia]

Slaves were considered the property of their owners who were part of the state, "indians not taxed" were not counted and those taxed were natives who had become part of the white man's civilization.

“Foreigners” have always been counted in their own Census districts. Your argument is based on a faulty premise. I agree with you in principle, I just wish you would frame the argument in a way that represents the truth of history.

 

[Swordsmyth]

“Foreigners” have always been counted in their own Census districts. Your argument is based on a faulty premise. I agree with you in principle, I just wish you would frame the argument in a way that represents the truth of history.

For much of our history we had no immigration control, all foreigners were here legally.
Counting illegal invaders is something relatively new and wrong, illegals are not "theirs" even if legal visitors are.

 

[euphemia]

That is not the point and never was the point. You can’t tell from a Census whether a noncitizen is legal or not. I am not going to talk to you about this any more. I gave you some advice to help you and you didn’t take it. Done.

 

[Swordsmyth]

That is not the point and never was the point. You can’t tell from a Census whether a noncitizen is legal or not. I am not going to talk to you about this any more. I gave you some advice to help you and you didn’t take it. Done.

Only the illegals will be scared of answering, why should a legal immigrant be afraid to answer?
All they are doing is asking their citizenship status, if the illegal volunteers the information that they are illegal then they shouldn't be counted and if they avoid the census taker they shouldn't be counted.

 

[PAF]

Only the illegals will be scared of answering, why should a legal immigrant be afraid to answer?
All they are doing is asking their citizenship status, if the illegal volunteers the information that they are illegal then they shouldn't be counted and if they avoid the census taker they shouldn't be counted.

And don’t forget: If you see something, say something.

 

[Swordsmyth]

And don’t forget: If you see something, say something.

 

[eleganz]

I am shocked, shocked that it was John Roberts.

Wasn't Roberts the deciding vote (when he was originally opposed to it) to implement ACA as a tax? I always thought that was blackmail, and I think this one is too.

Why are you against them asking if they are citizens, Zippy?

You know the answer to this. Zip has TDS and whatever Trump is for, there is a >insert socialist propaganda< answer for that.


The citizenship question must be enacted and I expect Trump to do it, his success in office will count on it. Honestly, they should've just slipped it in without saying anything and let the questions be asked later.

 

[PAF]

Honestly, they should've just slipped it in without saying anything and let the questions be asked later.

Gotcha.

Nancy Pelosi DOES have influence after all, even on RPF.

Interestingly enough, Trump said the same thing about due process.


I swear I am in a twilight zone on this forum anymore.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Gotcha.

Nancy Pelosi DOES have influence after all, even on RPF.

Interestingly enough, Trump said the same thing about due process.


I swear I am in a twilight zone on this forum anymore.

They have the authority and it isn't a "due process" issue, nobody is being convicted of or punished for anything.

 

[eleganz]

Gotcha.

Nancy Pelosi DOES have influence after all, even on RPF.

Interestingly enough, Trump said the same thing about due process.


I swear I am in a twilight zone on this forum anymore.

Due process is needed to be asked whether or not you are a citizen? We are asked this on so many forms for both public and private sector, its not even funny.

The left is only making a big deal out of this because
1) Trump supports it
2) Trump supports it
3) They will be exposed for allowing so many illegals to enter, once American people find out, dems will lose popularity.

If anybody here is Nancy Pelosi, its actually just you.

The citizenship question has absolutely nothing to due with due process and liberty.



My last encounter with you, I thought you were an idiot savant so I didn't continue to engage you but now I am convinced of it.

Can't stand the fake ass libertarians.

 

[PAF]

They have the authority and it isn't a "due process" issue, nobody is being convicted of or punished for anything.

You just do not get it. It is the principle. One thing that we have always promoted and fought for is transparency, whether the issue is right or wrong, different or indifferent.

I should not even have to explain this to you.

 

[Swordsmyth]

You just do not get it. It is the principle. One thing that we have always promoted and fought for is transparency, whether the issue is right or wrong, different or indifferent.

I should not even have to explain this to you.

Nonsense, there is no need to give Trump a proctological exam about asking people to declare their citizenship status and there is nothing in the Constitution that requires it.

You show yourself to be a liberal LARPing as an anarchist more and more.

 

[PAF]

Due process is needed to be asked whether or not you are a citizen? We are asked this on so many forms for both public and private sector, its not even funny.

The left is only making a big deal out of this because
1) Trump supports it
2) Trump supports it
3) They will be exposed for allowing so many illegals to enter, once American people find out, dems will lose popularity.

If anybody here is Nancy Pelosi, its actually just you.

The citizenship question has absolutely nothing to due with due process and liberty.



My last encounter with you, I thought you were an idiot savant so I didn't continue to engage you but now I am convinced of it.

Can't stand the fake ass libertarians.

Well the one thing that needs to come off the table is this new-found "illegal" that is trendy hot and popular. Which WILL result in more people being documented with Fed.gov, enabling them to receive "legal" handouts, mandated government minimum wage, and when receiving a pay check Fund the Fed.

Don't consider me a libertarian then. Shill calls me a anarchist. When convenient he sometimes he call me a lib. Whatever floats yer boat is fine with me. The fact remains, I can not stand STATISTS.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Well the one thing that needs to come off the table is this new-found "illegal" that is trendy hot and popular. Which WILL result in more people being documented with Fed.gov, enabling them to receive "legal" handouts, mandated government minimum wage, and when receiving a pay check Fund the Fed.

Don't consider me a libertarian then. Shill calls me a anarchist. When convenient he sometimes he call me a lib. Whatever floats yer boat is fine with me. The fact remains, I can not stand STATISTS.

Invaders is a much better word.
Collaborators and Traitors also comes to mind for some mysterious reason.

 

[eleganz]

Well the one thing that needs to come off the table is this new-found "illegal" that is trendy hot and popular. Which WILL result in more people being documented with Fed.gov, enabling them to receive "legal" handouts, mandated government minimum wage, and when receiving a pay check Fund the Fed.

Don't consider me a libertarian then. Shill calls me a anarchist. When convenient he sometimes he call me a lib. Whatever floats yer boat is fine with me. The fact remains, I can not stand STATISTS.

Why did you run away from your "due process" argument?

If you can't put up, why even quote me?

 

[fcreature]

Is this fake news?

My understanding is that the Supreme Court did not make a ruling on the Constitutionality of the question. From what I can tell, all they did is question the motives of Secretary Wilbur Ross (interesting, Roberts ignored the motives in the ACA to twist it into a tax). That and punt this issue back to the lower courts, where it will be drawn out and appealed back to the Supreme Court.

What am I missing here?

 

[Swordsmyth]

Is this fake news?

My understanding is that the Supreme Court did not make a ruling on the Constitutionality of the question. From what I can tell, all they did is question the motives of Secretary Wilbur Ross (interesting, Roberts ignored the motives in the ACA to twist it into a tax). That and punt this issue back to the lower courts, where it will be drawn out and appealed back to the Supreme Court.

What am I missing here?

From the article:

The decision makes it difficult for the Commerce Department to justify the question and make it part of the census before the forms have to be printed in only a few weeks. But it leaves the door open for the government to try again, and some legal experts believe the government could succeed.

“It’s almost a toss up, but I think in the end the census question probably will make it on. If the Census Bureau simply says it wants the question on to get a complete count, the Supreme Court will say that’s OK in the coming weeks,” said Tom Goldstein, publisher of the SCOTUSblog website and a lawyer who argues frequently before the court.

 

[PAF]

Why did you run away from your "due process" argument?

If you can't put up, why even quote me?

I didn't run away, eleganz. I'm just edgy tonight and your comment didn't sit well with me. It was not anything to do with "due process" but more about the statement: "Honestly, they should've just slipped it in without saying anything and let the questions be asked later."

Call me a lib this time around but I do not subscribe to census, so in this case the decision is fine by me. The problem becomes, whatever they decide now can be decided later, giving "Rule by 5" power over the people. And for the record, while I believe we should return to the Constitution in this current climate, there are parts that I do not agree with.

 

[eleganz]

I didn't run away, eleganz. I'm just edgy tonight and your comment didn't sit well with me. It was not anything to do with "due process" but more about the statement: "Honestly, they should've just slipped it in without saying anything and let the questions be asked later."

Call me a lib this time around but I do not subscribe to census, so in this case the decision is fine by me. The problem becomes, whatever they decide now can be decided later, giving "Rule by 5" power over the people. And for the record, while I believe we should return to the Constitution in this current climate, there are parts that I do not agree with.

If they can and should ask your age, they can and should ask your citizenship. What is the point of a census if there is absolutely no idea who is a citizen and who is not?

Completely ridiculous to say that its bad to ask a basic citizenship question on a national census (of all things) simply because you want to >insert libertarian/constitutional principle here<

This would not have even been an issue if the democrats weren't flooding the country with illegals to pad their election results.

 

[PAF]

If they can and should ask your age, they can and should ask your citizenship. What is the point of a census if there is absolutely no idea who is a citizen and who is not?

Completely ridiculous to say that its bad to ask a basic citizenship question on a national census (of all things) simply because you want to >insert libertarian/constitutional principle here<

This would not have even been an issue if the democrats weren't flooding the country with illegals to pad their election results.

You will be very pleased to know that my opinion does not matter and you may continue to propagate this "illegal" trash talk. The government will do whatever is required to grow itself at any cost. If it gets buy-in from folks like you, fine. If not from folks like me, still fine. Welcome to the grand illusion.