Posted on 06/27/2019 7:38:42 AM PDT by TexasGurl24
Roberts wrote an incredibly complex opinion where he is desperately trying to straddle the fence. The end result here, is that if the agency gives a good reason for the Census question then it stays.
“We do not hold that the agency decision here was substantively invalid. But agencies must pursue their goals reasonably. Reasoned decisionmaking under the Administrative Procedure Act calls for an explanation for agency action. What was provided here was more of a distraction.”
Explanation: Illegals don’t count when it comes to calculating the number of Congresscritters to come from a locale.
Don’t you just get turned on by ‘lawyer talk’? /sarc
The Court says that the secretary’s decision to reinstate the citizenship question was reasonable and reasonably explained, “particularly in light of the long history of the citizenship question on the census,” but on the other hand it says that it shares “the District Court’s conviction that the decision to reinstate a citizenship question cannot be adequately explained in terms of DOJ’s request for improved citizenship data to better enforce the” Voting Rights Act. “In these unusual circumstances,” the court says, “the District Court was warranted in remanding to the agency, and we affirm that disposition.”
Actually, the question is one of the main reasons for the census...
If the question is added, what is the punishment for lying on the census report????
WTBleep?! Who/what decides a good reason?!
Which district court was this?
I can’t wait until Trump’s second term when (short of an unexpected departure) at least one more left wing justice will retire. 5-4 is nice 6 to 3 or 7-2 is much better...
FNC is reporting that SCOTUS is blocking the citizenship question on 2020 census.
Bottom line: If it’s NOT on there, conservatives in blue states should refuse to fill it out.
The media is going to spin this as “No Census question in 2020” that’s NOT what the court did here. In fact, Robert’s opinion largely rejects the substantive objections New York raised regarding the agency’s power to include a citizenship question.
Any remand will be a mere temporary, and limited, “victory.” The media is going to spin it that way, but it is bull. The only thing the agency needs to do is further clarify why it wants the question.
That’s it.
Then the question is on the form.
The only issue now is time.
That guy is a slimy slippery snake. Another gift from the Bush Crime Family.
Unlike the partisan gerrymandering case, this opinion is complicated. In a rush to be first, this is the best one gets. Wait a few minutes for the full analysis.
The media is going to spin this as “No Census question in 2020” that’s NOT what the court did here. In fact, Robert’s opinion largely rejects the substantive objections New York raised regarding the agency’s power to include a citizenship question.
Any remand will be a mere temporary, and limited, “victory.” The media is going to spin it that way, but it is bull. The only thing the agency needs to do is further clarify why it wants the question.
That’s it.
Then the question is on the form.
The only issue now is time.
So did the good guys win?
news has the question is blocked,
where did you that headline ruling?
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.