Judge Blocks Trump Administration From Adding Citizenship Question To The Census

[refugee 169]

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-census-citizenship-question_us_5c1c1a19e4b05c88b6f68c25?obu&utm_source=reddit.com

States and activists said adding the question would cause fewer immigrants and minorities to respond.

By Sam Levine

 

•  

A federal judge blocked the Trump administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, a win for critics who say the question is unnecessary and would cause fewer immigrants and minorities to respond to the decennial survey.

The Trump administration is expected to swiftly appeal the Tuesday ruling from U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman of the Southern District of New York.

Several states and activists said immigrants, fearful of volunteering their immigration status to the Trump administration, would refuse to respond. The plaintiffs in the suit ― 18 states, the District of Columbia, several cities and a handful of immigrant rights groups ― argued the Trump administration intended to drive down the response rate among those groups when it added the question and ran afoul of a federal statute requiring them to rationally consider evidence and input before making a policy decision. 

In his opinion, Furman wrote the way the Trump administration added the question violated the federal statute, the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The law, Furman wrote, requires agencies to carefully study an issue before it implements or changes a policy. The Trump administration failed to do that in adding the citizenship question and the public rationale given by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, who oversees the Census Bureau, Furman said, was “pretextual.”

“Most blatantly, Secretary Ross ignored, and violated, a statute that requires him, in circumstances like those here, to collect data through the acquisition and use of ‘administrative records’ instead of through ‘direct inquiries’ on a survey such as the census,” Furman wrote. 

“Additionally, Secretary Ross’s decision to add a citizenship question was ‘arbitrary and capricious’ on its own terms: He failed to consider several important aspects of the problem; alternately ignored, cherry-picked, or badly misconstrued the evidence in the record before him; acted irrationally both in light of that evidence and his own stated decisional criteria; and failed to justify significant departures from past policies and practices ― a veritable smorgasbord of classic, clear-cut APA violations,” he continued.

While Furman found the Trump administration violated the APA, he said the evidence in the record did not show the decision to add the question was unconstitutional and motivated by an intent to discriminate.

[jg121783 3,907]

15 minutes ago, refugee said:

States and activists said adding the question would cause fewer immigrants and minorities to respond.

Not adding the question will make it appear as though there are more eligible voters in certain areas (mostly blue areas) than there actually are giving the democrats an unfair advantage. That is the real reason the left opposes it and their activist judges attempt to strike it down. Well see what happens when this is appealed to a reasonable court.

 

I should add that legally the only question on a census anyone is required to answer is how many people who are eligible to vote live in your household. The left never objected when they started asking about your income and other personal questions that you have no obligation to answer so how is this any different?

Edited January 15, 2019 by jg121783

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, jg121783 said:

Not adding the question will make it appear as though there are more eligible voters in certain areas (mostly blue areas) than there actually are giving the democrats an unfair advantage. That is the real reason the left opposes it and their activist judges attempt to strike it down. Well see what happens when this is appealed to a reasonable court.

 

I should add that legally the only question on a census anyone is required to answer is how many people who are eligible to vote live in your household. The left never objected when they started asking about your income and other personal questions that you have no obligation to answer so how is this any different?

One word...

 

Trump.

[Jeanne Adil 1,651]

i have gotten the long form every time and 2010  i refused to do it

i put # of people in home and income as that is used to determine some state and other beneits

we are  led to think census are private but i located my grandparents and greatgrandparents census info online

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

36 minutes ago, adil-rafa said:

i have gotten the long form every time and 2010  i refused to do it

i put # of people in home and income as that is used to determine some state and other beneits

we are  led to think census are private but i located my grandparents and greatgrandparents census info online

I cannot speak for my parents, but I don’t recall EVER getting a census form to fill out.  I must be blessed.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,315]

2 hours ago, jg121783 said:

Not adding the question will make it appear as though there are more eligible voters in certain areas (mostly blue areas) than there actually are giving the democrats an unfair advantage. That is the real reason the left opposes it and their activist judges attempt to strike it down. Well see what happens when this is appealed to a reasonable court.

 

I should add that legally the only question on a census anyone is required to answer is how many people who are eligible to vote live in your household. The left never objected when they started asking about your income and other personal questions that you have no obligation to answer so how is this any different?

it really is that simple. I think the judiciary is way out of bounds 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,315]

39 minutes ago, adil-rafa said:

i have gotten the long form every time and 2010  i refused to do it

i put # of people in home and income as that is used to determine some state and other beneits

we are  led to think census are private but i located my grandparents and greatgrandparents census info online

Its called the American community survey. I never have ever returned one period. They huff and puff but have never prosecuted. Its none of the Govts business how many crappers I have in my house 

[Dashinka 23,192]

I also don’t remember filling one out ever.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

6 hours ago, jg121783 said:

Not adding the question will make it appear as though there are more eligible voters in certain areas (mostly blue areas) than there actually are giving the democrats an unfair advantage. That is the real reason the left opposes it and their activist judges attempt to strike it down. Well see what happens when this is appealed to a reasonable court.

 

I should add that legally the only question on a census anyone is required to answer is how many people who are eligible to vote live in your household. The left never objected when they started asking about your income and other personal questions that you have no obligation to answer so how is this any different?

You are only required to answer how many people live in the household. Being eligible to vote has nothing to do with it. 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,315]

The Impact of Non-Citizens on Congressional Apportionment

https://cis.org/Impact-NonCitizens-Congressional-Apportionment

[refugee 169]

49 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

The Impact of Non-Citizens on Congressional Apportionment

https://cis.org/Impact-NonCitizens-Congressional-Apportionment

Non citizens pay Federal taxes, consume Federal services and are apart of the formula used to allocate Congressional districts, by law. 

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

23 minutes ago, refugee said:

Non citizens pay Federal taxes, consume Federal services and are apart of the formula used to allocate Congressional districts, by law. 

You are right unfortunately that they are used in the formula to allocate Congressional districts. It was reaffirmed by the SC in 2016. 

[jg121783 3,907]

6 hours ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Its called the American community survey. I never have ever returned one period. They huff and puff but have never prosecuted. Its none of the Govts business how many crappers I have in my house 

I had a belligerent census worker removed from my property by the sheriff's department once when I refused to tell them anything more than how many eligible voters live in my household.

 

2 hours ago, spookyturtle said:

You are only required to answer how many people live in the household. Being eligible to vote has nothing to do with it. 

Eligibility to vote was the original purpose of the census. That is how congressional districts were allocated. Unfortunately today non citizens are also counted for that purpose. Hence the reason asking about citizenship status is a good idea.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

14 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

I had a belligerent census worker removed from my property by the sheriff's department once when I refused to tell them anything more than how many eligible voters live in my household.

 

Eligibility to vote was the original purpose of the census. That is how congressional districts were allocated. Unfortunately today non citizens are also counted for that purpose. Hence the reason asking about citizenship status is a good idea.

Non citizens have nothing to do with the minimum required information, which is the number of people living in the household. 

[spookyturtle 9,465]

https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/Article_1_Section_2.pdf