“The high court released a short order Friday granting the government’s appeal of a trial court decision, which struck the citizenship question from the census form.
“The justices are taking the case before a federal appeals court has reviewed the trial court’s ruling, a highly unusual move.”
U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman (appointed by Barack Obama) recently ruled that the administration unlawfully appended the citizenship question to the census survey, claiming that the government had committed “a veritable smorgasbord of classic, clear-cut Administrative Procedure Act violations.”
Such a biased decision was appealed by the administration.
Many people argue that liberals are fighting the question so hard because they don’t want actual numbers to be available about the number of illegal criminals living in the U.S. and getting taxpayer welfare.
University of Richmond School of Law Professor Carl Tobias told reporters that the decision for the Supreme Court to accept the case and “the need to start printing the census surveys this summer probably led the court to grant review, but how the court rules on the merits remains unclear.”
Of course, liberal and democrat led groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) joined left-leaning state and city governments to sue the administration after Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross ordered the Census Bureau to include the citizenship question.
Many people argue that democrats must have a new, slavery-type base to ensure they continue to be voted into office.
“Since seats in Congress and federal funds are apportioned on the basis of population, the plaintiffs fear losing legislative representation and federal aid.
“Some figures suggest as many as 6 million individuals could be excluded from the census count if the citizenship question is incorporated.”
“Adding a citizenship question to the census would cause incalculable damage to our democracy,” Dale Ho, director of the ACLU’s voting rights project, said Friday.
Many people point out, yet again, that the United States is NOT a democracy, but a republic.
“The Supreme Court intervened at an earlier stage of the census dispute, after Furman granted the plaintiffs’ request to depose Wilbur Ross, given his inconsistent explanations as to why the citizenship question was added.”
They ruled that Ross should not be deposed.
“It is extremely uncommon for judges to permit depositions of cabinet officers and other senior executive branch officials. The high court lifted Furman’s order in October 2018.”
“In a separate opinion on that occasion, Justice Neil Gorsuch said the court should have gone further and lifted other Furman orders that gave the plaintiffs access to internal administration documents and permission to depose other government officials.”
“There’s nothing unusual about a new cabinet secretary coming to office inclined to favor a different policy direction, soliciting support from other agencies to bolster his views, disagreeing with staff, or cutting through red tape,” Gorsuch wrote.
Furman, without any proof whatsoever, said the ‘evidence indicated the secretary violated federal law by deviating from past administrative practices without explanation and cherry-picking pertinent evidence career staffers presented him, among other breaches.’
Of course, that seemed biased, given the fact that Ross was never deposed. And, this isn’t the first time the High Court has had to smack down Furman.
In its petition to the high court, the administration said that Furman’s decision improperly encroaches on Ross’s authority.
“The judgment below takes the unprecedented step of striking a demographic question from the decennial census and thereby preventing the secretary of commerce from exercising his delegated powers to ‘take a decennial census in such form and content as he may determine,’” Solicitor General Noel Francisco wrote.
“To the government’s knowledge, this is the first time the judiciary has ever dictated the contents of the decennial census questionnaire,” the petition reads elsewhere.
The citizenship question was a common feature of the census form until the 1950s, and the court will likely issue a ruling in late June.