Posted on 06/17/2019 8:43:44 AM PDT by bitt
The ACLU asks SCOTUS to delay ruling in Department of Commerce v. New York.
Sometime during the next two weeks, the Supreme Court is expected to hand down its ruling on whether the Census Bureau may include a question in the 2020 census asking if the person filling out the form is a U.S. citizen. If you think that’s a sensible question to ask in a nation whose population swells every year with immigrants from all over the planet, that means you’re in step with 60 percent of registered voters. It does, however, put you at odds with the Democrats, various leftwing activist groups, and an Obama-appointed judge in New York. Enter SCOTUS.
The Supreme Court took up the case early this year and heard oral arguments on April 23. It’s always difficult to predict a SCOTUS ruling by analyzing the questions asked by the justices during these hearings, but most Court watchers came away with the impression that the “conservative majority” would rule in favor of the Trump Commerce department. At which point, the Democrats did what they always do when they fear they are about to lose a Supreme Court Case — they sought some way to intimidate Chief Justice John Roberts. The ACLU came to their rescue:
The ACLU asked the Supreme Court to wait until the fall to decide if it will reject or allow the Trump administration to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. We requested the Supreme Court send the case to a lower court to consider new evidence showing the question was added for political purposes.
The “new evidence” consists of some information found on the hard drive of a Republican consultant named Thomas Hofeller. This fortuitous discovery ..
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
This census is extremely important for the left. It is a political tool to them. I would not trust it since the Swamp is in charge of it.
“Roberts will get rolled. he is a weak-willed man.”
He won’t get rolled on this. We are going to see 5-4’s in favor of the majority and 9-0’s where the case is so far out of whack even the lib justices can’t accept it.
Nice points. However, I don’t blame Hillary any more than I blame pests for invading my garden or rats for getting into my garage and getting into the dog foot. That’s what they’re born for.
I mostly blame the media. The media is what should mostly be above reproach. Then the voters can make a better decision.
But we also have accept one other thing. Voters, by their very nature, are shallow. It is the same in all Western democracies, and in 2nd and 3rd world countries too.
I usually say that voters’ memories are incredibly short. A GOP President will get elected and lead us to a period of incredibly prosperity. He then gets re-elected by a huge majority. But a mere 4-8 years later, no matter what, those same voters elect a liberal President who promises them the world. They forget where the prosperity came from!
The same goes with foreign policy. Every 12-16 years we elect a President who during his campaign says that if we’re just nicer to our enemies, they’ll be nice back! Obama in 2008; Clinton in 1992; Carter in 1976. You’d think we’d have learned the lesson, but nooo ...
Unfortunately, I don’t think that’s changeable. Voters are shallow and they are fickle.
What condescending nonsense.
States with large numbers of illegal aliens stand to lose seats in the House.
My observation is that pretty much whenever a leftist or leftist organization accuses the other side of something, they are projecting.
With no severability clause, overturning the mandate overturned the whole law. His “gambit” was illegal, per the explicit wording of the law.
Yes.
I don’t suppose anyone ever accused you of being an optimist? : - )
Agreed.
There are no contortions involved. There is no law that mandates you purchase health insurance. What there is, is a question on your tax form asking whether you have health insurance, and a reduction of your taxes if your answer is yes. It's no different than not earning the Earned Income Credit, or many other tax provisions and is clearly a tax.
The contortions came from people who wanted to pretend it wasn't a tax because they didn't want to be seen as raising taxes. So they lied.
"THIS IS WHAT DESTROYED OBAMACARE OVER THE PAST 4 YEARS."
Obamacare is still in effect. The mandates may be gone, but there are a lot of rules and regulations in Obamacare that negatively impact health care in this country, and will be operative until there's a full repeal.
I am offended by your silly 3 paragraph boondoggle as to why Roberts was correct in his ruling on obamacare, now I await patiently for your 3 paragraph boondoggle as to why Roberts will be correct in his deciding that the citizenship question is unconstitutional. You and your ilk are the enemy of the people!
I doubt if feelings education and marijuana are going to make better voters for our country.
I think these is some constitutional doubt about any severability clause that would bind the hands of the SCOTUS. But you’re right, I forgot to include that.
Look, Roberts ignored even more stuff you could scream about. The legislation originated in the Senate! And tax legislation, according to the constitution, cannot originate in the Senate. So once the Obama Administration argued that the mandate was a tax, not a fee, they were arguing themselves into constitutional limbo.
Nevertheless, I have no idea why Roberts, or the other justices, ignored this point as well. I suppose it was the philosophy that the citizens need to live with the laws their legislators pass, until new legislators come along and overturn them.
And you’re a pathetic moron, because if you read what I said I didn’t say Roberts was correct. I just said that he was face with two choices, both of which required some constitutional legerdermain. I wasn’t even defending him per se, I was just trying to show how he wasn’t “rolled” or “bribed” on Obamacare.
I wanted Obamacare overturned, too, by the way.
The purpose of this post was to see which Freepers are as shallow as AOC, and which Freepers will read something that is carefully written and ponder.
I now have my answer.
Ahem. I didn’t say he was correct. I was just explaining what he did. I wanted Obamacare overturned too, by the way, back in 2012.
But I’m also honest, and I wanted to challenge the notion that Roberts is getting “rolled” or “bribed.”
The purpose of this post was to see which Freepers are as shallow as AOC, and which Freepers will read something that is carefully written and ponder.
I now have my answer. I will not join that club that you so clearly have earned membership into.
Yes, of course, your three-word burst completely proves your point! [hand slap to forehead]
Hey clown, go back to twitter and join AOC’s feed, where all the geniuses there think they prove their 140 IQs in less than 50 characters.
Sooooo, how much is Obama paying you for this fairytale?
I don’t care what his rationale was, the bottom line is we got ObamaCare because of his vote.
The ACLU asks SCOTUS to delay ruling in Department of Commerce v. New York.
Thanks bitt.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.