Posted on 07/08/2019 1:09:13 AM PDT by SMGFan
The Justice Department is shaking up the legal team fighting for the inclusion of a citizenship question on the 2020 census but offered no specifics on why the change was being made.
The change announced Sunday comes days after the department vowed to continue to try to find a legal path forward to include the question on the census. The Trump administration has faced numerous roadblocks to adding the question, including a ruling from the Supreme Court that blocked its inclusion, at least temporarily.
President Donald Trump said last week that he was “very seriously” considering an executive order to get the question on the form. The government has already started to print the census questionnaire without the question.
The Justice Department is expected to file court papers Monday that show a new team of lawyers will take over.
“Since these cases began, the lawyers representing the United States in these cases have given countless hours to defending the Commerce Department and have consistently demonstrated the highest professionalism, integrity, and skill inside and outside the courtroom,” Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said in a statement.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
this has got to be causing a lot of (ahem) concern at the Cabinet level...
“offered no specifics on why the change was being made.”
Because PDJT is a businessman. And if your current team isnt getting it done then get a team together that will get it done.
That was my thought, as close to "You're fired!" as possible under Civil Service laws and regulations.
They know the faulty ‘reasoning” Roberts used to step on it - shouldn’t be too hard to make him back off or fully declare as a dem operative...
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.Seems to me that in order to enforce this, the government must know who is a citizen and who is not.
ML/NJ
Considering the fact that Jeffery B. Sessions Chief of Staff was running the team, I am not surprised that they failed to get the job done.
That was my thought as well. But, apparently it did not occur to the old legal team. Sounds like the old team has not been up to the challenge.
F the WaPo Fake News
Heard an analysis of Robert’s opinion on Fox this weekend. Essentially the opinion allows any/all groups (i.e. ACLU, enviros, etc.) to challenge in court any executive branch action because the reasons given in the action were not sufficient to support the action taken. With the number of Obama/Rat judges on the bench, these jurists could stop any action proposed in an Executive Order. Judge shopping by the Rats will prevent timely action taken by the President.
Because the request never should have been denied for the reason that they didn't provide a good reason. You're fired!
Thus explaining why they needed to be replaced with a competent team. This should be a no brainer. Of course we want and need to know if a census responder is in the country legally, sheesh.
If Hellary proposed this, there wouldn’t be any headlines.
Geez, it’s not like it wasn’t a question on previous forms or that people will lie.
I think the REAL problem was the SCOTUS, not the lawyers.
The same thing would have happened regardless of who the lawyers were.
This is just a way to give SCOTUS an opportunity to change their minds, without taking the blame. Just blame the lawyers that they didn’t make a strong enough case.
SCOTUS better be paying attention and do the right thing.
“I think the REAL problem was the SCOTUS, not the lawyers.”
The real problem is Roberts, a back stabbing traitor of the worst kind. He faked being an actual conservative and has screwed us but good.
What this is saying is that if a state denies (black) citizens a vote in national elections, the number of representatives will be reduced in proportion to the whole state. It doesn’t directly address illegal aliens voting. It does provide for action if voting rights are withheld from citizens. It should not be much of a stretch to show application to illegal aliens counted in the Census versus citizens voting in elections. and so the need to define who our citizens are necessitates the question on the Census.
:: the lawyers representing the United States in these cases have given countless hours to defending the Commerce Department ::
The legal team changed because they were CommDept lawyers. The courts, essentially, ruled against the Executive Administration so the team will be White House lawyers in the lead.
”Do it, because it buys time to foment the correct legal argument on cert.And having a hard time understanding why Trump doesn't force a white-shoe outside legal counsel upon Census, which is loaded with AFGE -- second only to the VA, I believe -- and picks their lawyers according to that bad seed.
But at least on cert the White House can insert itself into the legal arguments.”
That’s more or less who is representing Census.
I am put off that Mulvaney did not insist on outside counsel from the get-go.
He shouldn’t be wearing both hats ! (OMB and Acting CoS).
Read the CraPo article and it’s obvious Census lawyers intentionally tanked their argumentum and theory of the case...
Stephen Miller , get control on this now!
ML/NJ
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.