Trump signs order targeting Illegal Aliens in the US census (1 Viewer)

< Previous | Next >

BobE

Guv'nor
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
1,460
Reaction score
1,378
Location
Norfolk,Va
Offline
Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump signed a presidential memorandum on Tuesday that would exclude undocumented immigrants from being counted in congressional districts when district lines are redrawn next year.
The memorandum marks the Trump administration's latest effort to change the way US populations are counted and advance the President's immigration agenda, and like previous efforts is certain to end up in court.
"I have accordingly determined that respect for the law and protection of the integrity of the democratic process warrant the exclusion of illegal aliens from the apportionment base, to the extent feasible and to the maximum extent of the President's discretion under the law," the executive order states.
Trump has long sought to use the US census as a way to advance his immigration priorities but the Supreme Court rejected an attempt to ask respondents if they are US citizens in 2019. The administration, however, is allowed to collect information on citizenship status by other means.


There will be lawyers and courts
 

wardorican

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2019
Messages
1,383
Reaction score
1,235
Age
40
Location
Ft. Lauderdale
Offline
Okay, NAME the constitutional article or amendment that gives illegal aliens a right to be counted in the Census. NAME another article that says they are entitled to even be in a country they entered ILLEGALLY.
We'll wait.
Article 1, section 2. Amendment 14, section 2.
 

superchuck500

does good at rockets
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Messages
916
Reaction score
1,756
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
Okay, NAME the constitutional article or amendment that gives illegal aliens a right to be counted in the Census. NAME another article that says they are entitled to even be in a country they entered ILLEGALLY.
We'll wait.
Article 1 Sec. 2 refers to determining representation by the “numbers” in the states based on an “actual enumeration” derived from counting. Congress, in the Census Act of 1790, defined those terms to mean "number of inhabitants", and has since defined it to mean "population" - and the place that they are counted is the person's "usual place of abode" . . . which has been interpreted to mean a persons's "residence." The 14th Amendment, Section 2, also refers counting of "inhabitants." The Supreme Court has routinely interpreted this collection of terms to mean an actual count of the population of the state/district . . . the number of people living there.

It's not surprising that the First Congress interpreted the Enumeration Clause's reference to "numbers" to mean "inhabitants" for purpose of the census - as citizenship was complicated in 1790 . . . no adults were natural citizens. But the 14th Amendment's use of "inhabitants" demonstrates that the census is not meant to be a count of citizens. The Constitution and various acts of Congress refer to citizens for different purposes - if the count was intended to only be of citizens, that term would have been used. And at no time since the 14th Amendment, including through scores of acts and amendments relative to the census, has Congress changed the basic concept of the census as a count of population, which is synonymous with inhabitants . . . based on where the person "usually" lives.

While the census system vests the Secretary of Commerce with broad powers to conduct the census, those powers do not include the authority to redefine material terms in the Constitution and federal statute. Nor does Article II nor the executive order process give the president authority to redefine materials terms in the Constitution and federal statute.

The White House's sole defense of this obvious defect is to point out that visitors to the United States for business or tourism are not counted in the census, nor are diplomats. Conversely, non-residents such as foreign personnel overseas are counted. This, according to the White House, gives the executive branch discretion to determine who qualifies as an "inhabitant."

This justification is clearly flawed - as it wholly ignores the statutory basis and history of "usual residence." (In a 1993 publication, the Census Bureau noted that usual residence refers to where a person lives an sleeps most of the time, a concept that is the 'guiding principle' for the census). Inarguably, temporary visitors for business or tourism don't consider the U.S. their usual residence. Other law establishes that diplomats are not considered residents for a wide variety of purposes including taxation and natural citizenship of diplomat children.

So, in reality, the president doesn't have discretion to define "inhabitant" in a manner that is inconsistent with the relevant federal statute and statutory history - and the preferred support for that discretion so thin that it's obviously nothing more than an effort to hold a straight face when trying to justify it. It won't survive judicial review.
 
Last edited:

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline
In case you don't know this....the US Census counts every person living in the US. If you live in the US, it counts you. Pretty simple concept.
That is not what I asked. I asked for that part of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION that gives illegal aliens a right to everything, including the census. The only reason I mentioned the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION is because you liberals did. So are you able to answer the question or are you now going to admit there is nothing in the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION that gives illegal aliens rights to be counted in the Census?

A or B.
 

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline
Yeah....this is starting to smell like a troll is in the vicinity....
A troll is someone who deliberately tries to cause trouble. Earlier on, someone mentioned the Constitution. So I asked for the specific Article or Amendment.

It's called DISCUSSION. Your response is trollish.
 

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline
This makes zero sense. Do you think being counted by the census has some sort of reward for the person counted? How is the act of counting them “rewarding criminal behavior”?

(Folks, relax. I'm just answering a question. I'm not insulting anyone or trying to cause trouble. I just disagree with an opinion. Don't take it personally.)

Anything other than deporting an illegal alien is rewarding criminal behavior. The Census is a way to determine all kinds of government benefits, and even the number of representatives an area might have in the House. Giving illegal aliens their own representatives in Congress IS rewarding criminal behavior. And illegal alien in America is a CRIMINAL. He/she committed a crime by illegally crossing our border or illegally overstaying a VISA.


You don’t get anything for being counted. Can you say how you make sense out of this?


Not according to the Census commercial.


"...it is a count that informs where hundreds of billions in funding will go each year..."
 

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline
There are 3 branches of government. The Judicial branch, of which the Supreme Court is a part, has already ruled what he did as unconstitutional. Quite simple.
I didn't ask about the three branches of government. I asked about the Constitutional Article or Amendment this action violates. But if you want to continue the bit about the Supreme Court, then produce the case that ruled what the President did was unconstitutional.

(In the mid-90s, when I was in college for paralegal studies, the only online source for court cases was Lexus or Westlaw. They were very expensive sources to use, which is why our professors made us learn to use the reporters that the law offices spent thousands of dollars on. Today, producing cases is just a matter of doing a search.)

Here's how easy it is:

Roe v. Wade

All I had to do was a simple search to pull up the most famous liberal Supreme Court ruling of all time.

So can you produce the court case where the Supreme Court ruled that what the President did was unconstitutional?
 

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline

Using the royal we are you? Lol.


Are you triggered by a pronoun?

Do you think that people who have committed crimes are not counted by the census? I’ll give you a hint, they are counted. Everyone is counted. You don’t have to be a citizen to be counted. The founders set it up that way, so your argument is with them, actually. Or, you could do a 10 second look at Wiki and find out you’re being lied to by whatever source of propaganda you are currently patronizing.

Do you think there is a difference between a non citizen and an illegal alien? There are a LOT of legal immigrants in this country who are not citizens. They are not criminals. They haven't violated our borders. They just haven't taken the oath yet. Illegal aliens are distorting the makeup of an area and they should not be counted in the census. They should be deported. President Trump was right to do what he did. And if it could have been determined that a very large number of illegals from some X country were all Trump supporters, I guarantee you would take the same attitude our President is taking today.

“The United States Census (plural censuses or census) is a decennial census mandated by Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, which states: "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States... according to their respective Numbers... . The actual Enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years".[a][1] Section 2 of the 14th Amendment amended Article I, Section 2 to include that the "respective Numbers" of the "several States" will be determined by "counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.” “

Article I, Section Two does not mention the Census. Section Two is about how representatives are chosen for the US House. There is ZERO mandate for any sort of Census. Here's the text:

https://constitution.findlaw.com/article1.html

The President (and most of America) believes that a bunch of illegal aliens should not be rewarded a few extra Democrat Congressmen based on their committing a crime by entering America illegally. Not only should they not be counted, they should be deported and required to get in back of the line behind those who followed the law and are coming here LEGALLY.

I certainly have no problem with LEGAL immigrants being counted in the US Census, nor do I have a problem with them voting. I (and most of America) have a MAJOR problem with illegal aliens not only voting, but shaping the party structure of Congress.

Most of America believes that criminal behavior should not be rewarded in any fashion.
 

superchuck500

does good at rockets
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Messages
916
Reaction score
1,756
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
That is not what I asked. I asked for that part of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION that gives illegal aliens a right to everything, including the census. The only reason I mentioned the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION is because you liberals did. So are you able to answer the question or are you now going to admit there is nothing in the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION that gives illegal aliens rights to be counted in the Census?

A or B.
It is very specifically what you asked - you asked what in the Constitution allows illegal aliens to be counted in the census. The census (in both the Constitution and federal statutes) isn't a "right", it's a process. And that process is defined to count inhabitants based on their usual place of living.

It's that simple - and it has always been that way. And I have given you the basic mechanics of how it works under constitutional and federal law. You can insist on premises or angles that don't exist but you're not going to get anywhere. If you want to explain why the Enumeration Clause, 14th Amendment, and federal census statutes provide a basis to exclude illegal aliens, I'm listening.
 

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline
It is very specifically what you asked - you asked what in the Constitution allows illegal aliens to be counted in the census. The census (in both the Constitution and federal statutes) isn't a "right", it's a process. And that process is defined to count inhabitants based on their usual place of living.

Fair enough. Where in the Constitution is there a RIGHT to a process.

It's that simple - and it has always been that way. And I have given you the basic mechanics of how it works under constitutional and federal law. You can insist on premises or angles that don't exist but you're not going to get anywhere. If you want to explain why the Enumeration Clause, 14th Amendment, and federal census statutes provide a basis to exclude illegal aliens, I'm listening.

The 14th Amendment is a pretty lame argument. There is no single racial makeup of illegal aliens. They come from all over the world. (Maybe it's because of McDonalds.) The ONLY single label that unifies all illegal aliens is CRIMINALITY. Are you now going on record as suggesting Criminality should be a protected class? Is THAT what you imagine the 14th Amendment was created for?

Convicted felons in America are not allowed to own firearms. That is denying them an actual CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. So there is PLENTY of precedent for denying illegal aliens pretty much everything. If it were a just world, they would all be deported and required to stand behind those who waited their turn to come into this country.

And if a major generation of LEGAL aliens were to come here and register Republican, you people would find some way to get them excluded from the Census.
 

superchuck500

does good at rockets
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Messages
916
Reaction score
1,756
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
It is very specifically what you asked - you asked what in the Constitution allows illegal aliens to be counted in the census. The census (in both the Constitution and federal statutes) isn't a "right", it's a process. And that process is defined to count inhabitants based on their usual place of living.

Fair enough. Where in the Constitution is there a RIGHT to a process.

It's that simple - and it has always been that way. And I have given you the basic mechanics of how it works under constitutional and federal law. You can insist on premises or angles that don't exist but you're not going to get anywhere. If you want to explain why the Enumeration Clause, 14th Amendment, and federal census statutes provide a basis to exclude illegal aliens, I'm listening.

The 14th Amendment is a pretty lame argument. There is no single racial makeup of illegal aliens. They come from all over the world. (Maybe it's because of McDonalds.) The ONLY single label that unifies all illegal aliens is CRIMINALITY. Are you now going on record as suggesting Criminality should be a protected class? Is THAT what you imagine the 14th Amendment was created for?

Convicted felons in America are not allowed to own firearms. That is denying them an actual CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. So there is PLENTY of precedent for denying illegal aliens pretty much everything. If it were a just world, they would all be deported and required to stand behind those who waited their turn to come into this country.

And if a major generation of LEGAL aliens were to come here and register Republican, you people would find some way to get them excluded from the Census.
You're just spewing rhetoric - none of that is appropriate legal analysis. And your premise that the census is somehow based a concept of "right to be counted" has no support in law or jurisprudence. The 14th Amendment citation isn't an "argument" - it's the Constitution. Section 2 expressly refers the counting process (i.e. the census). The White House's justification cites it and agrees that the process is based on inhabitants.

I also wonder why you're presuming that there is a direct correlation between illegals in the census and Democratic seats. I have seen estimates that somewhere between 40 and 50 percent of undocumented immigrants live in in rural or suburban areas.
 

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline
You're just spewing rhetoric - none of that is appropriate legal analysis.

Gee! Everybody here is spewing rhetoric. Everybody here has an opinion and every opinion is as valid as the next. As far as your ideas about "appropriate legal analysis" I guess you never heard of the appellate court system, have you? Go into a law office in Florida. You'll see bookshelves lined with volumes of The Southern Reporter, or The Florida Reporter. (Different names of the West volumes for different parts of the country.) They are ALL based on appellate court OPINIONS. They are ALL based on legal analysis. And you probably didn't know that in the law NO jury verdict is EVER overturned based on the facts. ANY appeal of a jury verdict is based on legal analysis, disagreement in law. Your view is no more valid than mine.

And your premise that the census is somehow based a concept of "right to be counted" has no support in law or jurisprudence.

Then explain all the Census ads and the promises of billions of dollars in funding. Obviously, filling out a census is not a paid occupation, so those billions could be construed as an "entitlement," which is another way of saying "a right."


The 14th Amendment citation isn't an "argument" - it's the Constitution.


Duh. And I cited it correctly.

Section 2 expressly refers the counting process (i.e. the census). The White House's justification cites it and agrees that the process is based on inhabitants.

And the White House's actions do not rise to the level of being unconstitutional.


I also wonder why you're presuming that there is a direct correlation between illegals in the census and Democratic seats. I have seen estimates that somewhere between 40 and 50 percent of undocumented immigrants live in in rural or suburban areas.

Let's see. Alzheimer Joe is campaigning on extending health care benefits to illegal aliens. Heavily Democrat California ILLEGALLY gives drivers licenses to illegal aliens. Democrats EVERYWHERE are opposed to polling centers requiring a photo ID on Election Day. You don't see illegal Sanctuary Cities run by Republicans.

Illegal aliens are pretty much a Democrat Party dance.
 

superchuck500

does good at rockets
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Messages
916
Reaction score
1,756
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
You're just spewing rhetoric - none of that is appropriate legal analysis.

Gee! Everybody here is spewing rhetoric. Everybody here has an opinion and every opinion is as valid as the next. As far as your ideas about "appropriate legal analysis" I guess you never heard of the appellate court system, have you? Go into a law office in Florida. You'll see bookshelves lined with volumes of The Southern Reporter, or The Florida Reporter. (Different names of the West volumes for different parts of the country.) They are ALL based on appellate court OPINIONS. They are ALL based on legal analysis. And you probably didn't know that in the law NO jury verdict is EVER overturned based on the facts. ANY appeal of a jury verdict is based on legal analysis, disagreement in law. Your view is no more valid than mine.

And your premise that the census is somehow based a concept of "right to be counted" has no support in law or jurisprudence.

Then explain all the Census ads and the promises of billions of dollars in funding. Obviously, filling out a census is not a paid occupation, so those billions could be construed as an "entitlement," which is another way of saying "a right."


The 14th Amendment citation isn't an "argument" - it's the Constitution.

Duh. And I cited it correctly.

Section 2 expressly refers the counting process (i.e. the census). The White House's justification cites it and agrees that the process is based on inhabitants.

And the White House's actions do not rise to the level of being unconstitutional.

I also wonder why you're presuming that there is a direct correlation between illegals in the census and Democratic seats. I have seen estimates that somewhere between 40 and 50 percent of undocumented immigrants live in in rural or suburban areas.

Let's see. Alzheimer Joe is campaigning on extending health care benefits to illegal aliens. Heavily Democrat California ILLEGALLY gives drivers licenses to illegal aliens. Democrats EVERYWHERE are opposed to polling centers requiring a photo ID on Election Day. You don't see illegal Sanctuary Cities run by Republicans.

Illegal aliens are pretty much a Democrat Party dance.
You asked a question about the legal basis for the census. I gave you a detailed response that you have yet to rebut. You can have all the opinion you want - go for it. But until you provide a legitimate response about what the law actually provides, it's just rhetoric.

I'm not going to waste my time arguing rhetorical ideas with you, you clearly have strong convictions about it. We can circle back to this discussion after the policy is invalidated in court.
 

RushRoom

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
57
Reaction score
97
Age
65
Location
floridas
Offline

You asked a question about the legal basis for the census. I gave you a detailed response that you have yet to rebut. You can have all the opinion you want - go for it. But until you provide a legitimate response about what the law actually provides, it's just rhetoric.



WRONG. I merely asked WHERE in the Constitution it said illegal aliens had the right to be counted in the Census. So far, you haven't provided any answer to that. You HAVE tried to change the subject, which is pretty typical in the WOKE universe. As far as arguing what the LAW says, I didn't see you citing any laws from the U.S. CODE nor any actual Supreme Court opinions. And they're pretty easy to find.


I'm not going to waste my time arguing rhetorical ideas with you, you clearly have strong convictions about it. We can circle back to this discussion after the policy is invalidated in court.

I"m surprised you're taking this so seriously. We don't even exist here. And nothing we say really matters.
 

superchuck500

does good at rockets
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Messages
916
Reaction score
1,756
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
I merely asked WHERE in the Constitution it said illegal aliens had the right to be counted in the Census. So far, you haven't provided any answer to that. You HAVE tried to change the subject, which is pretty typical in the WOKE universe. As far as arguing what the LAW says, I didn't see you citing any laws from the U.S. CODE nor any actual Supreme Court opinions. And they're pretty easy to find.
I didn't change the subject, I provided of the legal basis for the census being a count of inhabitants, defined as people based on where they live. I cited Article I, the 14th Amendment, the Census Act of 1790 and its subsequent amendments . . . the citation for which is 13 U.S.C. Sec. 1, et. seq. The Supreme Court has held repeatedly the Enumeration Clause and federal census legislation calls for an actual count of population. I could spend time pulling the cites but it's pointless because you aren't even going to attempt to provide a legitimate rebuttal. You continue to characterize the question in a way that finds no support in law or history to argue that I'm not answering the "question" - but that's not how it works. The "subject" is how the census works.

You have provided nothing in support of your alleged legal position that the authorities that provide for the census do not give a basis to count illegal aliens. Your refusal to engage on the substance, regular use of caps and colors to try to add emphasis to your otherwise unpersuasive comments, and insistence on applying political labels to people you don't even know yet aren't endearing.
 

Woohoosaint

Active member
Joined
Dec 6, 2019
Messages
59
Reaction score
28
Age
51
Location
Hampton, Arkansas
Offline

None of this bothers you all? How many of you thought what Obama did was horrible overreach, yet say nothing about this man who cares nothing about our Constitution nor our system of government?
Quoting a liberal source?!?
I believe that I'm starting to see pattern here :unsure::unsure::unsure:
 

Woohoosaint

Active member
Joined
Dec 6, 2019
Messages
59
Reaction score
28
Age
51
Location
Hampton, Arkansas
Offline
Last edited by a moderator:

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

< Previous | Next >

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Fact Checkers News Feed

General News Feed

Top Bottom