Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It's Happening: President Trump Set to Take Executive Action on Census Citizenship Question

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    It's Happening: President Trump Set to Take Executive Action on Census Citizenship Question

    who wouldnt want a count of CITIZENS ?


    1997 Bayliner Trophy 2352
    5.7 Mercruiser/Alpha I Gen II /Full Closed Cooling
    San Diego, CA

    HookEmDanO out ......

    the more people I meet the more I love my dogs !

    #2
    Didn’t the courts already rule on this?

    KEVIN SANDERS
    4788 LISAS WAY - SEWARD ALASKA
    where are we right now​​​​​​???​

    https://share.findmespot.com/shared/...j23OquWOj2N3Xe

    Comment


    • iceclimber
      iceclimber commented
      Editing a comment
      The Supreme Court in fact, and apparently Trump is moving to defy them.

    • hookemdano
      hookemdano commented
      Editing a comment
      thats why Trump is going exec action...

      not enough time to get back to the courts...printing deadline issue

    • iceclimber
      iceclimber commented
      Editing a comment
      Lie.
      Trump is trying to replace his legal team like that will somehow magically make a difference. Too late, and also repeatedly denied by 2 federal judges. Just another example of the clown car known as the Trump administration.

    #3
    here is the "reason" :

    The Court ruled 5-4 that although including the question is legal, government attorneys did not adequately explain why it was being included.




    The Trump administration is up against a census printing deadline and likely doesn't have enough time to re-litigate the issue in court.
    1997 Bayliner Trophy 2352
    5.7 Mercruiser/Alpha I Gen II /Full Closed Cooling
    San Diego, CA

    HookEmDanO out ......

    the more people I meet the more I love my dogs !

    Comment


    • iceclimber
      iceclimber commented
      Editing a comment
      Guess they should plan better.

    • hookemdano
      hookemdano commented
      Editing a comment
      seems that exec action is a GREAT plan as of now

    • ksanders
      ksanders commented
      Editing a comment
      you are 100% correct. I cannot believe what the liberals spin on a ruling.

    #4
    Originally posted by ksanders View Post
    Didn’t the courts already rule on this?
    Yup, 5-4 ruling it is ok to ask.
    It has been asked before, why the uproar by the libbies????

    Anyway, next up, it also asks what sex are the people in the house. I wonder if there are going to be 20 different options to choose from since that has become such a difficult question for some.
    Esteban
    Panama City, Panama
    Former Bayliners 3218, 2859, 2252, 1952
    Currently looking for 32xx in South Florida

    Comment


    • iceclimber
      iceclimber commented
      Editing a comment
      I hope Trump defies the Supreme Court. Then we can ask those lovers of the Constitution (aka The Republicans) what do you think about that.

    • hookemdano
      hookemdano commented
      Editing a comment
      remember

      The Court ruled the question is legal,

    • iceclimber
      iceclimber commented
      Editing a comment
      Really. Let's see the ruling on that. Seems to me that SCOTUS sent it back to Commerce because the legal argument was insufficient.

    #5
    So, why was the citizenship question taken off the 2010 census?
    That was the first time it was not on the decennial census.
    Esteban
    Panama City, Panama
    Former Bayliners 3218, 2859, 2252, 1952
    Currently looking for 32xx in South Florida

    Comment


    • Rick_Kenyon
      Rick_Kenyon commented
      Editing a comment
      Because Obama wanted to include illegals so they could gerrymander the allocation of federal funds to states like Cali, Oregon, Washington and New York which are Dem strongholds and have lots of illegals that need more Federal and State aid.

    #6
    OK, so Here is a link to the ACTUAL SCOTUS ruling.

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...8-966_bq7c.pdf

    Do you guys actually read these things???

    SCOTUS DID NOT RULE AGAINST THE CENSUS QUESTION!

    They actually ruled that the Commerce Secretary has the authority to ask the census question, in paragraph 2 of the ruling.

    What they ruled was that the commerce secretary needs to supply their rational back to the lower court as to why they want to ask the question.

    Guys, before you quote SCOTUS take a minute to actually read the ruling.

    Since 1790 there have been 23 censuses. All but one of them asked at least part of the population about citizenship or place of birth.

    Oh, thats right in the ruling too.

    You should be embarassed.

    In my post I asked a innocent question, as to wether SCOTUS had ruled on this, and all I got back was the “liberal spin”. What total bullshit.

    KEVIN SANDERS
    4788 LISAS WAY - SEWARD ALASKA
    where are we right now​​​​​​???​

    https://share.findmespot.com/shared/...j23OquWOj2N3Xe

    Comment


    • iceclimber
      iceclimber commented
      Editing a comment
      Not sure why the hissy fit. I said in plain English the ruling sent it back to Commerce. You know, after you asked if the Court ruled.

      Speaking of embarrassment Trump is backing down AGAIN.

    • hookemdano
      hookemdano commented
      Editing a comment
      yea..I dont understand the hissy fit.,.speaking of embarrassment.... look ...speaking of embarrassments...look at ice...what an embarrassment

    #7
    The Census Act confers broad authority on the Secretary, but it does not leave his discretion unbounded. The §701(a)(2) exception is generally limited to “certain categories of administrative decisions that courts traditionally have regarded as ‘committed to agency discretion,’ ” Lincoln v. Vigil, 508 U. S. 182, 191. The taking of the census is not one of those areas. Nor is the statute drawn so that it furnishes no meaningful standard by which to judge the Secretary’s action, which is amenable to review for compliance with several Census Act provisions according to the general requirements of reasoned agency decisionmaking. Because this is not a case in which there is “no law to apply,” Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe, 401 U. S. 402, 410, the Secretary’s decision is subject to judicial review.


    Altogether, the evidence tells a story that does not match the Secretary’s explanation for his decision. Unlike a typical case in which an agency may have both stated and unstated reasons for a decision, here the VRA enforcement rationale—the sole stated reason—seems to have been contrived. The reasoned explanation requirement of administrative law is meant to ensure that agencies offer genuine justifications for important decisions, reasons that can be scrutinized by courts and the interested public. The explanation provided here was more of a distraction. In these unusual circumstances, the District Court was warranted in remanding to the agency



    Any more lectures anyone ?

    Comment


      #8
      Trump to back away from census question

      https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/11/polit...ion/index.html


      Comment


        #9
        And he came up with a much more accurate method where the illegal alien does not provide the information ... genius
        It's all a dream
        '03 245 5.7/BIII & '06 175

        Comment


        • iceclimber
          iceclimber commented
          Editing a comment
          Trump: snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
      Working...
      X