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.
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
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?
FNC is reporting that SCOTUS is blocking the citizenship question on 2020 census.
where did you that headline ruling?
........... I heard the opposite .... that the Citizenship Question .... WILL NOT be on the 2020 Census .....
Effectively, the question will not be on the 2020 Census.
With the rapid demographic changes, it's less likely it will be on the 2030 (or later) Census.
in order to have true representation of the populous, a verifiable number of citizens is needed.
Another step in the Mexican takeover of our nation
OK so say for the sake of argument the Democrats launch a nationwide campaign calling for people to answer every question on the census form but leave the citizenship question unanswered. What does that do to the count? Does the entire form get thrown out for lack of that answer? Or does it go through and the individuals get counted?
I guess the question, how many people live in your Household should be replaced with how many Burglars, Trespassers and Squatters live in your Household.
So now there will be a case on the explanation.
I thought another article said they ruled against it, because they did not give adequate justification.
U.S. Supreme Court blocks Trump’s census citizenship question, for now
The U.S. Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a significant defeat on Thursday, ruling that his administration did not give an adequate explanation for its plan to include a contentious citizenship question on the 2020 census and preventing its addition to the decennial survey for now.
Let's take a little stroll down Memory Lane regarding the Census Bureau and "meaningful" decision-making.
Does anybody remember when President Obama nominated Republican Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) to be the Secretary of Commerce?
The Senate was 58-41 Democrat, with one vacancy (Franken/Coleman dispute). Suspicious political junkies immediately realized that New Hampshire had a Democrat governor, and nominating Gregg to Commerce would allow the governor to replace him with a Democrat to give the Democrats a 60-seat filibuster-proof majority when Franken is seated.
Gregg demanded assurances from the Governor of New Hampshire that he would be replaced by his chief-of-staff, but we all know how good the word of a Democrat is, especially with control of the Senate at stake.
The lure for Gregg was the census, until Obama misplayed his hand by announcing that he was moving the Census Bureau from its longstanding home at Commerce to now being run directly from the Oval Office. Upon that news, Gregg withdrew his name from consideration and stayed in the Senate.
It's clear that Obama wanted direct control of the mechanics of the census by his desire to take over. Was this a decision that the Supreme Court would have considered to require more explanation?
-PJ