Trump signs order targeting undocumented immigrants in the US census

[pppolitics]

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, the issue will 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 order states.

The American Civil Liberties Union plans to challenge the memo, Dale Ho, director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, said in a statement.

[...]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/21/politics/white-house-census-undocumented-immigrants/index.html

[soundchaser]

Haven't we done this rigamarole already? What's different about it this time that the SCOTUS would uphold it?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Why should illegal immigrants be counted when it comes to house representation

[soundchaser]

Why should illegal immigrants be counted when it comes to house representation

Take it up with the phrase "whole persons" in the Constitution.

[lfromnj]

I think states should use it for legislatures but yeah I cant see a congressional argument.

[brucejoel99]

Link to Trump's "memorandum"

For the purpose of the reapportionment of Representatives following the 2020 census, it is the policy of the United States to exclude from the apportionment base aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), to the maximum extent feasible and consistent with the discretion delegated to the executive branch.

Seems to contradict the plain text of the 14th Amendment. In fact, I'm not sure there's even any good-faith argument that it doesn't contradict it. The Supreme Court has ruled on this time & time again: the Constitution very purposely uses both "persons" & "citizens."

Also, there isn't even a citizenship question on the Census. How are they gonna determine who's & who isn't a citizen? Are they just gonna build lists of likely non-citizens at each agency (IRS, DHS, state DMV's, etc.), merge them, & then subtract that from each states' Census total? And it's not like this would be straightforward: a massive amount of data engineering would be required to remove bad data & duplicates across all of these agencies' lists. If you failed to remove duplicates, you could cause states with a large undocumented immigrant population to lose representation for citizens.

Not to mention, conservatives have been fighting the use of statistical sampling in the Census for decades. So they'd oppose the use of statistical principles to add up the number of people who live in a particular census block, but then would apply the use of statistical principles to subtract the people who shouldn't count? That'd be inconsistent & hypocritical, but it's not like that's ever stopped the GOP in the past.

[Tender Branson]

This is logistically completely impossible to implement as well ...

The Census Bureau has got all hands full to even collect the raw population totals until October 31 and then compile the raw total population number until April 30.

With insignificant data on citizenship (mentioned above), it is impossible to create citizenless apportionment data in such a short timeframe.

At some point, the CB will simply tell Trump they cannot do it.

Case solved.

(And if Congress doesn't pass the extension by 4 months, as requested by the CB, they only have until Dec. 31 to produce the numbers ...)

[OSR stands with Israel]

Why should illegal immigrants be counted when it comes to house representation

Take it up with the phrase "whole persons" in the Constitution.

They literally are not supposed to be in this country and should get 0 representation in Congress

[brucejoel99]

Why should illegal immigrants be counted when it comes to house representation

Take it up with the phrase "whole persons" in the Constitution.

They literally are not supposed to be in this country and should get 0 representation in Congress

Well, our literal Constitution disagrees.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Why should illegal immigrants be counted when it comes to house representation

Take it up with the phrase "whole persons" in the Constitution.

They literally are not supposed to be in this country and should get 0 representation in Congress

Well, our literal Constitution disagrees.

They weren’t counted until 1980

[soundchaser]

Why should illegal immigrants be counted when it comes to house representation

Take it up with the phrase "whole persons" in the Constitution.

They literally are not supposed to be in this country and should get 0 representation in Congress

Again, your fight is with the text of the Constitution itself. This is a brazen violation of the 14th Amendment. Whether or not you think it’s right is a different argument.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Why should illegal immigrants be counted when it comes to house representation

Take it up with the phrase "whole persons" in the Constitution.

They literally are not supposed to be in this country and should get 0 representation in Congress

Again, your fight is with the text of the Constitution itself. This is a brazen violation of the 14th Amendment. Whether or not you think it’s right is a different argument.

So you guys are using strict constructionist thinking when it comes to issues you like but disregard it in other areas

[lfromnj]

This is logistically completely impossible to implement as well ...

The Census Bureau has got all hands full to even collect the raw population totals until October 31 and then compile the raw total population number until April 30.

With insignificant data on citizenship (mentioned above), it is impossible to create citizenless apportionment data in such a short timeframe.

At some point, the CB will simply tell Trump they cannot do it.

Case solved.

(And if Congress doesn't pass the extension by 4 months, as requested by the CB, they only have until Dec. 31 to produce the numbers ...)

That is true

I wonder if states could use a registered voter list instead to count everyone for purposes of legislative redistricting.

[soundchaser]

So you guys are using strict constructionist thinking when it comes to issues you like but disregard it in other areas

Pot, kettle, etc.

(I think the Constitution is open for much interpretation, but it’s hard to argue that an undocumented person is not a “whole person” if prisoners or children are.)

[brucejoel99]

Why should illegal immigrants be counted when it comes to house representation

Take it up with the phrase "whole persons" in the Constitution.

They literally are not supposed to be in this country and should get 0 representation in Congress

Again, your fight is with the text of the Constitution itself. This is a brazen violation of the 14th Amendment. Whether or not you think it’s right is a different argument.

So you guys are using strict constructionist thinking when it comes to issues you like but disregard it in other areas

Wow, conservative projection at its absolute finest.

[Saint Milei]

Only a mindless partisan hack would oppose this

[GeorgiaModerate]

Only a mindless partisan hack would oppose this

Only a partisan hack would oppose counting everyone in the country, as specified in the Constitution?  For once I agree with you.

[brucejoel99]

Only a mindless partisan hack would oppose this

Section 2 of the 14th Amendment: "Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed."

United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez (1990), whose majority included Rehnquist & Scalia: "Persons" are simply human beings, irrespective of any relationship to the political community they might have.

So either you're suggesting that Rehnquist & Scalia were partisan Democrats (since they would oppose this), or you're wrong. Which one is it?

[7,052,770]

Why should illegal immigrants be counted when it comes to house representation

Take it up with the phrase "whole persons" in the Constitution.

They literally are not supposed to be in this country and should get 0 representation in Congress

You're more than welcome to try to get a Constitutional Amendment passed.

Unlike a lot of amendment proposals, it would probably have a shot at 38 states.

[The Dowager Mod]

Strict constitutionalism only applies to the 2nd amendment you silly libs.

[Mike Thick]

Is it possible that this gets tied up in litigation until it’s too late to go back? Seems like the only justification here that makes any sense

[lfromnj]

Ok Which Democrats would support this in the constitution?

[brucejoel99]

Is it possible that this gets tied up in litigation until it’s too late to go back? Seems like the only justification here that makes any sense

No, because it wouldn't go into effect so long as it's stayed by a court. It is possible that it gets tied up in litigation until it's too late to realistically implement, though.

[SteveRogers]

Why should illegal immigrants be counted when it comes to house representation

Take it up with the phrase "whole persons" in the Constitution.

They literally are not supposed to be in this country and should get 0 representation in Congress

And yet they are in this country, they do go to school, own businesses, and use the hospitals, emergency services, etc. in their communities. So like it or not, congressmen do have to represent the interests of communities where illegal immigrants are woven into the fabric of the local society (just like they represent the minors, legal immigrants, and disenfranchised felons in their districts). To pretend otherwise would simply be to endorse a legal fiction.

[pppolitics]

Why should illegal immigrants be counted when it comes to house representation

Why were slaves counted as 3/5 of a person?