Opinion: Judge Andrew Napolitano: Census asks too many questions – it’s just supposed to determine our population size - PressFrom - US
  •   
  •   
  •   

OpinionJudge Andrew Napolitano: Census asks too many questions – it’s just supposed to determine our population size

17:50  11 july  2019
17:50  11 july  2019 Source:   foxnews.com

Census shouldn’t ask about citizenship

Census shouldn’t ask about citizenship It makes sense to omit a question about citizenship from the census, in order to get the most accurate count of our population.

Judge Andrew Napolitano . | Posted: Jul 11, 2019 12:01 AM. The First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments constitutionally limit the only question that the census may ask , and the only question the recipient of the census must answer, to how many persons reside in the recipient' s dwelling.

Judge Napolitano 's Chambers: Judge Napolitano explains why, according to the Constitution, President Trump Fox News' Senior Judicial Analyst Andrew Napolitano expressed genuine shock at today's bombshell testimony during Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher's trial today, saying that " it ' s highly

Judge Andrew Napolitano: Census asks too many questions – it’s just supposed to determine our population size© REUTERS/Carlos Barria A protester holds a sign outside the U.S. Supreme Court where the court ruled that U.S. President Donald Trump's administration did not give an adequate explanation for its plan to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census, delivering a victory to New York state and others challenging the proposal in Washington, D.C., June 27, 2019.

Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.

Late last month, the Supreme Court ruled on a challenge to a question that the Commerce Department announced it would add to the 2020 census. The census itself has been mandated by the Constitution to be taken every 10 years so that representation in the House of Representatives could be fairly apportioned to reflect population changes.

Judge signs order permanently blocking citizenship question from 2020 census

Judge signs order permanently blocking citizenship question from 2020 census A federal judge in New York on Tuesday signed an order permanently blocking the Trump administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, days after President Trump gave up on his efforts to get such a question on next year's census.The order, signed by Judge Jesse Furman, was jointly drafted by the parties opposing the citizenship question.It stops administration officials "from including a citizenship question on the 2020 decennial census questionnaire; from delaying the process of printing the 2020 decennial census questionnaire after June 30, 2019 for the purpose of including a citizenship question; and from asking persons about citizenship sta

Judge Napolitano ' s Chambers: Judge Andrew Napolitano weighs in on the information revealed in the Such a communication could have been unlawful if it interfered with American foreign policy. Click here to read more from andrew napolitano . Andrew P. Napolitano , a former

It is now just a question of time before the truth comes out, and when it does, it will be a beauty! Fox’ s Andrew Napolitano argued, “The Democrats should be ashamed of themselves for doing this Politics is supposed to stop at the water' s edge and whatever they have on the president, they ought

Over the years, the folks who prepare the census developed an appetite for peering into the personal lives of everyone living in America, and Congress – which has the same mentality as the census bureaucrats – permitted this. So, the Census Bureau began adding personal questions in the census itself.

The First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments constitutionally limit the only question that the census may ask, and the only question the recipient of the census must answer: How many persons reside in the responder’s home?

BOOKER INTRODUCES BILL TO RESTRICT USE OF CENSUS CITIZENSHIP QUESTION

Yet, that constitutional question was not good enough for the bureaucrats. In addition to asking about bedrooms and toilets and education, this year, the census folks were instructed by President Trump to ask the citizenship status of all persons. But the Supreme Court ruled that, on the justification offered by the Commerce Department, the question may not be asked.

Justice Department signals to court it's still fighting for citizenship question

Justice Department signals to court it's still fighting for citizenship question A federal judge had ordered the DOJ to explain the president's tweet and administration's position.

The Trump administration has been pushing to add a citizenship question to the census , an effort that is still ongoing despite the fact that late last month the Fox News Radio' s Guy Benson sat down with Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano to make some sense out of the left' s

Retired Judge Andrew Napolitano , the senior judicial analyst for Fox News, is off the air indefinitely. White House press secretary Sean Spicer cited Napolitano ' s charge last week when asked why President Trump continues to stand by his initial claim.

Here is the backstory.

Though this has taken on serious political overtones, it is simply an issue about the government rejecting personal liberties – again. So, when the census folks first revealed their intention to ask the citizenship question, two challenges were filed in different federal courts, and each sought to ascertain the reason for the question.

That's because – even though the Constitution only mandates and only permits one question: "How many persons live here?" – federal law, in defiance of the Constitution, permits ancillary questions if the answers to those questions will assist the mission of the Census Bureau or the broader federal government.

Thus, the lawsuits challenging the proposed citizenship question forced the federal government to explain how the answers received from this question would help the government to do its work.

Both federal courts enjoined the printing of census forms until the feds explained themselves. When Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross refused to be interrogated at a deposition, a bureaucrat unfamiliar with the secretary's and the president's thinking came and testified. He told lawyers for the challengers and the Department of Justice that the feds needed citizenship data to enforce the Voting Rights Act.

Trump expected to end his fight to add citizenship question to census, sources say

Trump expected to end his fight to add citizenship question to census, sources say President Trump on Thursday was expected to announce that he is ending his fight to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

Judge Napolitano ' s Chambers: Judge Andrew Napolitano explains why America' s spies now have The use of general warrants was so offensive to our Colonial ancestors that it whipped up more serious It required the feds to seek a warrant from federal judges . The targets were not Americans.

"If it ' s not classified it ' s not criminal." "At the time this occurred -- by this I mean, Professor Richman We use cookies to offer you a better experience and to help us understand how you use our site. Fox News Judge Andrew Napolitano walked back statements he made earlier this week that former FBI

All courts that examined that basis for the citizenship question – including the Supreme Court – disbelieved it. The Supreme Court characterized the stated reason as "contrived" and it directed the lower courts to keep their injunctions in place while they sought to determine the true motivations for the question.

When senior officials at the Commerce Department and the Justice Department read the Supreme Court decision and examined the relevant law, they instructed the Justice Department lawyers who were trying the cases to inform the judges in each case that the government recognized its defeat; the census would proceed without the citizenship question.

Then the president got involved and characterized what Justice Department lawyers – his Justice Department lawyers – told two federal judges as "fake news." The Justice Department then pulled these career lawyers off the cases and sent in new teams of lawyers to try to come up with a lawful and credible reason to justify the citizenship question.

The Department of Justice is in a pickle on this because judges are always skeptical when lawyers – particularly government lawyers who needn't worry about collecting a fee from a client – are replaced during a case with no rational explanation. It is far more likely that the career Justice Department lawyers resigned from the cases – rather than reverse or contradict themselves – than it is that the department brass removed them.

Second judge rejects Justice Department request to change census lawyers

Second judge rejects Justice Department request to change census lawyers A federal judge on Wednesday rejected the Department of Justice's bid to swap attorneys working on a case involving the census citizenship question, the second judge to do so in as many days.Judge George Hazel wrote that he agrees with the other judge's "well-reasoned order" rejecting the Trump administration's proposed change in legal teams, saying "that a shift in counsel at this late stage may be disruptive to an already complicated and expedited case." Hazel, an Obama appointee, said that he would ultimately be open to allowing the DOJ lawyers to leave the case and ruled in such a way that will allow the request to be made again.

What if it is impossible to list completely the freedoms that all people enjoy by reason of our humanity? What if this is just an empty boast? What if there is a government within the government that never changes Andrew P. Napolitano , a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is

Judge Andrew Napolitano explains why gun-free zones are the most dangerous places on Earth and what 'the In its two most recent interpretations of the right to self-defense, the Supreme If it pre-existed the government, it must come from our human nature. I once asked Justice Antonin Scalia

Can new Justice Department trial teams salvage the department's cases? I don't see how. The Commerce Department alleged that the reason for the census question was to assist in the enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court declined to accept that explanation because the Voting Rights Act does not apply to three-quarters of the states and there was no request from the Justice Department – which enforces the Voting Rights Act – asking for this.

Moreover, federal courts uphold a doctrine that prohibits the government in a constitutional challenge from supplying reasons for its behavior as an afterthought – an after-the-fact rationalization. That doctrine will bar the judicial consideration of any reason that has not already been offered to support the citizenship question.

Compounding this is a statement that the president made last weekend; namely, that the citizenship question was being asked for reapportionment purposes. Hold on. That statement directly defies the consistent Justice Department arguments that reapportionment has nothing to do with this.

Does the census count only citizens, citizens and lawfully resident noncitizens, or all persons? It counts all persons. Thus, citizenship is irrelevant to its counting mission and to the government's enforcement of the Voting Rights Act, as noncitizens cannot vote.

Can the president rectify this with an executive order? In a word: no. The judicial injunctions against asking the question would apply to and supersede an executive order.

This mess is yet another example of personal liberty versus government power. On one side is the right to privacy in the home, expressly guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment, and the right to silence, expressly guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment and by implication in the First Amendment. On the other side is an avaricious government that wants to know all it can about persons in America – whether constitutional or not.

Could a future Commerce Department ask how many guns are kept in the house or who living there goes to Mass on Sunday or if any resident has had an abortion? How much longer will a free people permit these intrusions? How much longer will we be a free people?

Trump doubles down on citizenship question for 2020 census, reportedly mulls executive order.
President Trump on Thursday doubled down on his push for a citizenship question on the 2020 census.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 6
This is interesting!