Posted on 01/15/2019 7:19:39 AM PST by COBOL2Java
Edited on 01/15/2019 7:50:35 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
NEW YORK (AP)
(Excerpt) Read more at wtop.com ...
Black-robed tyrants. Fine, then—add the question using whatever procedure is acceptable to the d*ckhead.
What nonsense.
Plenty of time to be overruled.
If that question isn’t on the census, I will refuse to participate.
How predictable.
I received this as a “Breaking News” item, but on WTOP website they changed the title, removing the word “Breaking” - so this may or may not qualify.
“...while such a question would be constitutional,...”
Then you admit Trump was right, but you just want to monkey around just to score a point.
SCOTUS will rule in favor of Trump. So get the printers going!
The Obama judge:
On June 7, 2011, President Barack Obama nominated Furman to a seat on the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York that had been vacated by Judge Alvin Hellerstein, who had taken senior status in January 2011.[1][3] On September 15, 2011, the Senate Judiciary Committee reported his nomination to the Senate floor by voice vote. On February 15, 2012, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid filed cloture on Furman’s nomination.[4] On February 16, 2012, the Senate, by unanimous consent, vitiated the cloture vote on the nomination and agreed to a final vote on the nomination. On February 17, 2012, the United States Senate confirmed Furman in a 62–34 vote.[5] He received his commission the same day.[2]
A 2005 article in the New York Observer identified Furman as a potential future Supreme Court nominee.[6]
Personal
Furman’s brother Jason Furman served as an economic adviser to President Barack Obama.[7]
The liberals are hell-bent on destroying this country.
Okay, then they have no business asking such things as race, sex, gender or any other question than ‘How Many?’..................
Resubmit under proper procedure and we're good to go.
Yep, lots of time to get this sorted before 2020. The Dems played the judge card too soon?
Roberts needs to reign in his fellow jurists who sit on the bench.
Separation of powers clause precludes the Judiciary from telling the Executive what proper procedure should be.
My questions are:
1) Why does the judge think it was arbitrary?
2) What are the proper procedures that the judge thinks should be followed?
Gotta love Wilbur. But he’s a billionaire and probably used to being arbitrary
and getting his way.
why are we even fighting over this?
if they are not legal they should not even be here.
so simple, yet so hard for the left to grasp.
Pure, unadultered silliness to oppose a question that is DIRECTLY RELEVANT to census matters.
The march towards a judgeocracy continues
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.