Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Government

Judge bans citizenship question in 2020 census, says Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross 'violated public trust'

2019-01-16

[ABC] A federal judge in New York on Tuesday blocked the Trump administration from asking about citizenship in the 2020 census, finding that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross "violated the public trust" when he decided to insert a citizenship question.

While the Constitution gives the Secretary of Commerce "broad discretion" over the census, U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman said Ross violated administrative procedures. Furman called Ross's decision to include the question "arbitrary and capricious."

"Secretary Ross’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census ‐ even if it did not violate the Constitution itself ‐ was unlawful for a multitude of independent reasons and must be set aside," Furman wrote.

Posted by:Besoeker

#15 I answered the required info and blew off the "how many miles do you commute to your feeble employment in your carbon-spewing death trap of pollution you racist bastard" questions. No reaction back

Posted by: Frank G 2019-01-16 19:55

#14 What about all the intrusive questions I recall from the last census that I was told to answer On pain of law and perjury charges

If memory serves, you can refuse to answer most/all of the questions on the decadal census. However, there is something called the American Community Survey. It looks and smells like the Census, but is on-going and much more detailed. And has legal penalties associated with your response.

Posted by: SteveS 2019-01-16 19:42

#13 The Dems simply want to obstruct and delay. They shouldn't teach pubs these tricks.

Posted by: Fat Bob Glaise8594 2019-01-16 19:17

#12 It looks like the last decade Census asked for citizenship? Wow, the MSM/Democrats lied, or just did really shoddy investigations??

Posted by: NoMOreBS 2019-01-16 18:33

#11 2000 census. Skip to question 13

https://www.census.gov/history/www/through_the_decades/index_of_questions/2000_1.html

Posted by: Uneretch Thravigum9074 2019-01-16 17:04

#10 What about all the intrusive questions I recall from the last census that I was told to answer On pain of law and perjury charges such as my income, did I own my domicile, etc. etc. What abut those extras that got added in a Big Brother™ fashion to the census?

Posted by: magpie 2019-01-16 14:46

#9 Surely there is time before 2020 to bring this case to the SCOTUS.

Posted by: Abu Uluque 2019-01-16 12:01

#8 ..missed the SCOTUS ruling?

Your aristocracy at work.

Posted by: Procopius2k 2019-01-16 11:27

#7 The Constitution calls for a census for enumeration of the House of Representatives.

But they only represent citizens, so differentiating between citizens and non-citizens when counting is critical information.

Posted by: trailing wife 2019-01-16 10:36

#6 @Frank G

I didn't even bother looking, you just know shite that blatant is person who thinks the constitution is just a bit of paper.

Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2019-01-16 10:33

#5 I'd tell the judge to go to hell and continue anyway.

Posted by: DarthVader 2019-01-16 09:39

#4 Amazing the expanse of power the ~~aristocracy~~ judiciary claims. The Constitution calls for a census for enumeration of the House of Representatives. That's it.

Posted by: Procopius2k 2019-01-16 07:49

#3 Appointed by Barack Obama

Posted by: Frank G 2019-01-16 07:06

#2 Had the Trump administration had blocked voting by dogs and cats a federal judge would have claimed a 'violation of public trust' as well.

We have obviously arrived at the theater of the absurd.

Posted by: Besoeker 2019-01-16 02:36

#1 These "judges" are laughably biased.

Mind you the census should just ask your name, id and previous addresses and dates.

Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2019-01-16 02:31

00:00