Quantcast
Connect with us

Supreme Court slaps down Trump’s citizenship Census question in surprise ruling

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the Dept. of Commerce v. New York, where the state of New York sued over the question the Trump administration placed on the census asking about legal citizenship.

The Court decided that they agreed with lower court decisions and that the reason for putting the question on the census was “invalid.”

It was a 5-4 ruling but it was Chief Justice John Roberts who joined with the liberal justices.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Trump administration claimed they needed the question to comply with federal voting rights laws, but New York called it purely partisan because it will prompt fewer Latinos to fill out the census. With fewer people filling out the census, legislative seats are more likely to garner Republican Congressional districts through gerrymandering.

The piece of the argument that made things different was that a key Republican operative who recently died had developed a plan for this census question for exactly this purpose. The hard drives uncovered on the late GOP operative showed that the Trump administration used his documents to justify putting the question on the census.

“The documents released yesterday make clear that the administration’s true motivation for adding the citizenship question is to enable a political power grab that would benefit Republican voters while disenfranchising Democrats and people of color,” wrote the Brennan Center for Justice.

Each lower court considering the issue has blocked the Trump administration from adding the question. Congress has attempted to hold a hearing and investigate the issue, but Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross has refused to appear or provide documents.

The decision sent the question back to lower courts and told the Commerce Department that they could try to write the question again, though it didn’t give guidance for how. The Commerce Department said that they had to have the decision by the court by the end of June because they had to print the census out. If the Department rewrites the question and asks the Supreme Court to rule on the re-written question, it would not be decided until the next session, because the court goes on a break until their October term.

ADVERTISEMENT


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Fox News legal analyst makes stunning prediction: Trump will testify under oath in impeachment trial

Published

on

Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano predicted that President Donald Trump would testify during his impeachment trial.

Napolitano told "America's Newsroom" anchor Bill Hemmer on Thursday that he believed the president would testify on his own behalf once the House votes to impeach him and the Senate holds a trial, reported The Hill.

“If you go to a Senate trial, who testifies on behalf of the president?” Hemmer asked.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Mitch McConnell may let Republicans write Senate impeachment rules without Democratic votes

Published

on

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is plotting to shut out Democrats on impeachment if a bipartisan compromise on rules for the trial can't be reached.

The Kentucky Republican said this week that he hopes to reach an agreement on rules for the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, but he's also readying a "backup plan" in case he can't reach an agreement with Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, reported Vanity Fair.

“The first thing Sen. Schumer and I will do is see if there’s a possibility of agreement on a procedure,” McConnell said. “That failing, I would probably come back to my own members and say, ‘Okay, can 51 of us agree how we’re going to handle this?’”

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Fresno Bee burns Nunes to the ground in scathing editorial

Published

on

The editorial board of the Fresno Bee has written a scathing takedown of Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) for his extraordinary fealty to President Donald Trump, which the editors say is harming the country.

Specifically, the editorial accuses Nunes of forsaking his oath of office as a congressman to serve as Trump's most loyal toady on the House Intelligence Committee.

"As has been true for nearly all of Trump’s first term, Nunes has relinquished his proper role as an independent representative of Congress and has instead acted like a member of the Trump 2020 re-election team," the editorial states.

Continue Reading