The question should be, “How much less accurate is it?”
I see no problem with the census including other questions but I think the primary goal of the census is to count people and there should be a limit to how much the accuracy of that count is impacted by other questions.
If they can show that the count becomes less accurate but it is statistically insignificant then fine. It remains that the constitutional directive is to count people. Not gather other info. So the other info gathering, while fine, should take a back seat to the primary goal of accurately counting the populace.
If the citizenship question does not hurt that count then I have no problem with it being asked.
The constitution says that the census should be conducted in such a way as congress shall by law direct.
Congress passed a law that says the Secretary of Commerce shall conduct the census in such a form and content as he may determine. Furthermore, the “the Secretary is authorized to obtain such other census information as necessary”
Given that the Constitution explicitly gives congress the authority to direct the census in any way they see fit, and congress explicitly give the Secretary of Commerce power to conduct the census in any form he wants, there is no way that asking about illegals is unconstitutional. It is an obvious decision.
The constitution demands we hold a census every ten years. If the administration decides to do something that imperils that count happening or damage its accuracy it is absolutely the place of the court to stop it and see that the constitutional directive is carried out appropriately.
I don’t think one has ever tried, but if they did, the obvious remedy would be for Congress to curtail his delegated power to determine the way the census is to be conducted. This isn’t a situation that even remotely resembles that though. Commerce isn’t saying they’re not going to ask non-citizens questions or count them. The fear is that illegals won’t respond / answer the questions. A better analogy would be what if the Secretary of Commerce wanted to ask about sexual orientation on the census and some people raised the concern that gays might respond at lower rates due to the presence of that question.
How does the Constitution feel about the government getting census information that is completely wrong, and allocating resources for public services based on misleadingly bad data?
if that’s the case, and Commerce has carte blanche to run the census any way it wants, why did Wilbur Ross lie so much about the reasons for including the question?
puddleglum’s position seems to be the Commerce Secretary can do as they see fit as regards the census. End of story.
I am suggesting that is not completely true with an extreme example.
And while it would be good if congress did its job clearly they do not always do so and the third, co-equal, branch of government is well within its purview to step in and put a stop to such things.
Congress and the Commerce Secretary do not have the right to damage the census in any way they see fit. The commandment from the constitution on this is to count the people living in the US every ten years and, one would presume, do it as accurately as can be done (within reason). The court enforcing that it happens that way is entirely appropriate.
The question is would you bet your home, family and livelihood on an administration that has shown complete disregard for the rule of law and personal hatred towards you and your kind, not “accidentally” releasing it to people it shouldn’t?
Even if in general collecting statistical information is permissible, it can’t be motivated by impermissible reasons. If the purpose was to discriminate, then an otherwise legal action could be transformed into something illegal.
I mean, you know that already. But I typed it so I’m posting it.
My view - I think this wont make much difference, I think the question of law is pretty straight forward, and should have been included from inception.
Because the Trump Administration lost at the district level, and applied for cert. [Here are the QP:]((1) Whether the district court erred in enjoining the secretary of the Department of Commerce from reinstating a question about citizenship to the 2020 decennial census on the ground that the secretary’s decision violated the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 701 et seq; (2) whether, in an action seeking to set aside agency action under the APA, a district court may order discovery outside the administrative record to probe the mental processes of the agency decisionmaker – including by compelling the testimony of high-ranking executive branch officials – without a strong showing that the decisionmaker disbelieved the objective reasons in the administrative record, irreversibly prejudged the issue, or acted on a legally forbidden basis; and (3) whether the secretary’s decision to add a citizenship question to the decennial census violated the enumeration clause of the U.S. Constitution.)
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and Congress has directed the Secretary to conduct in a certain way, including questions about how many bathrooms you have and do you own a radio and are you a citizen. So the liberals on the Court want to overturn both the law and the Constitution, by saying No, Congress may not direct.
We are going to have a census. And it is being carried out as the Constitution directs.
They couldn’t only send it to heterosexuals. They could, I suppose, include questions about sexual orientation, and if Congress didn’t like it, Congress could overrule those questions.
Of course, the question “what gender are you?” would make the census form twenty pages longer from all the combinations and permutations.
And that THAT’S THE POINT OF THE QUESTION. This is like “voter ID laws.” It’s not solving – nor is it INTENDED to solve – any question. It’s only being brought up as a way to suppress non-GOP votes. Nobody actually cares about the actual answer to the question.
That’s not the argument either. The question presented is in part, whether the Secretary employed impermissible reasoning in including the question. That’s not wanting to overturn the law and the Constitution. If the Secretary made his decision because he hates Hispanic people, wants them to not respond to the census, and is trying to discriminate against them because of their race, then that’s forbidden. Forbidding that type of reasoning is wholly consistent with the constitution.
I’m arguing what I usually argue in cases like this - the Constitution says what it says, not what liberals want it to say. The Constitution says the census shall be carried out as Congress directs. The liberals on the Court want the Constitution to say the census shall be carried out as they direct.
Then the remedy is for Congress to modify the law to say “you can’t include citizenship questions because you hate Hispanics - you can only include them if you want to know how many people are non-citizens.” That way, Congress is fulfilling their Constitutional duty of directing the census.
If people are afraid to fill out the census because they think they will be deported if they answer it, then they need to be reassured that census information cannot and will not be used against them, or released to the INS, or anything like that. Just like filing your taxes - it is strictly confidential. Unless the House Judiciary committee wants to have a peek, but that probably won’t happen.