Posted on 03/07/2019 9:04:59 AM PST by RideForever
Oh dear.
The last time the citizenship question was on the standard census form was 1950.
Since then, some form of the question has appeared on either the long form, sent to 16% of households every 10 years, or the American Community Survey sent to 3.5M randomly selected households each year.
The question wasn't on the 2010 census because the long form had been dropped as it's been replaced by the ACS.
BS! Now it’s clear you are parroting leftist talking points.
Ping to 78.
Thanks SMGFan.
TMI pdf
census 2020
https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/newsroom/press-kits/2018/ccc-guide-d-1280.pdf
All the illegals need to submit to a DNA test if they want to be counted.
Also, for the purpose of state legislatures, it is a constitutional requirement (equal protection of the laws).
It would be prohibitively expensive for each state to conduct its own census.
The court did rule on that but the fact that illegals are present in the census is conveniently ignored.
Are they Indians not taxed? Are they persons?
Apparently. And well compensated to boot.
And what was their ruling?
I was referring to the SCOTUS requirement on state legislatures (Reynolds v. Sims, I think). It seems a natural consequence of equal protection that if both chambers must be apportioned on population, that states must know if their residents are citizens or not. Otherwise they are denying equal protection. The 14th amendment specifically says citizens. There is some wiggle room for the US House.
I would argue that by virtue of the fact that these people are here illegally, they shouldn’t be counted. The Constitution wouldn’t distinguish them because our founders were textualists.....the law is what the law says, not one someone feels or what they believe the intent was of those who crafted the law. IOW, you can’t count what’s not here and according to the law, they would have been deported.
Not sure how that would stand up against the explicit "whole number of persons" language and the precedent set by every census that's come before, but I won't be surprised if we find out.
Well, the Constitution says to count the "whole number of persons", not citizens.
As for the idea that they would have been deported, don't forget that at the time of the framing and for the first hundred years of the republic there was no such thing as an illegal alien.
We had open borders and everyone was welcome, so it makes sense that the framers would have wanted to count everyone.
At the time, yes. But when the Constitution was written, States were regulating immigration and it wasn’t a Federal responsibility, nor were the immigration laws that exist today (and ignored) in place. Including illegal invaders in the Census is akin to levying income taxes on bank robbery proceeds.
Advanced degree in BS Art? If not, fools have sure as hell fooled yourselves. The census counts many things but counting diplomats, foreigners, other targeted people, and things of interest, are N0T a part of the enumeration that apportions representatives. Foreigners and diplomats have ZER0 representation in Congress.
To say otherwise is blowing it out the backside in a demonstration of foolishness. Two jokers simply do not know what they are reading.
Two fools lying to themselves, two jokers inventing fiction out of whole cloth.
***********************************************************************
*** Why are Blue States suing over a 200-Year-Old Census Citizenship Question? ***
***********************************************************************
Citizenship is a normal thing to include in a major government survey, hence why virtually all major government surveys do. The census has since 1820.
1820
The first time the census asked about citizenship status was in 1820, which is actually before the census even introduced individual-level questions about age and sex (before 1850, all questions focused on the head of household, with other household members usually not named).
The 1820 question asked about “foreigners not naturalized,” so non-citizens. But that is certainly in the realm of a citizenship inquiry.
1830-1840-1850-1860
Place-of-birth questions were added, asking where people were born. That format repeated in 1860. To ask where you are born is a form of citizenship inquiry.
1870
In 1870, the census asked a citizenship question. All emancipated slaves were counted as “naturalized citizens,” as the Fourteenth Amendment had extended them citizenship. Indeed, estimating the effects of abolishing slavery was the key purpose of the 1870 citizenship question.
1880-1890 No citizenship related questions! Time to celebrate with lefties, no?
1900-1910-1920-1930-1940-1950
Modern citizenship question: anyone born in the United States was counted as a citizen, including emancipated former slaves, while people not born in the United States but naturalized were naturalized citizens, and everyone else non-citizens. That question persisted until 1950.
1960-1970
The Census form was too long, too hard to administer; included questions about migration, income, education, race, sex, age, housing, citizenship, birthplace, fertility, mortality risks, disability, and many other factors. Getting everybody to respond to this incredibly long document was increasingly hard. The 1960 census dropped some questions, and merged the formerly separate Census of Population and Census of Housing into one form. This format persisted until 1970.
1980-1990-2000
The form was still too long to conveniently administer to the whole population and lacked sufficient detail for many important questions about the population. The Census Bureau made a decisive choice: there would be two different census forms.
About 80 percent of people would get a “short form” with basic questions: age, sex, race, household structure, housing tenure; 20 percent of the population would get a “long form” which asked more detailed questions including a question about citizenship.
So in 1980, 1990, and 2000, the census long form asked about citizenship. It’s simply false to say that no census since 1950 has asked about citizenship: long-form recipients did not fill out short-form censuses. 0ne out of five Americans filled out the long form. It was a large enough statistical sample to establish a baseline for all Americans.
2010 the citizenship question was REMOVED BY RAHM EMANUEL. Now why would he do that?
2020 The citizenship question has been RESTORED. But Democrats and their lefty judges are trying to block its restoration. Now why would they do that?
And why would media fools spew vitriol accusing the White House of making LIES about a citizenship question being asked in nearly every census year except when it was removed in 2010?
They lie because they get their talking points from 0NE source at 4:30 am from a recording that is erased quickly. Many of them don’t know they are lying, they are fools. But they damage the country by not checking. Checking their talking points is a lot of work. It’s much easier to be lazy and collect pay for unchecked talking points. And it’s fun for them as they all chime in together to talk up a storm of propaganda.
They are all scripted in a similar fashion to their counterparts in local media as seen in this one and a half minute video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hh_Kx7UKndI
Oh right, yes, at the US House level it’s iffy. I was referring to the state legislature level.
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.