Trump orders new census that does NOT count illegal immigrants

[Zincwarrior]

Illegal invaders may roam "free" but when they are caught they are detained/deported....So, not so free.

You are cute. It includes those bound. The only exception is slaves-hence the term "Free." Quit whilo you're behind.

Interestingly, both Texas and Florida would lose majorly under this proposal. Of course, illegals don't answer the census in the first place.

 

[Rogue AI]

Which means less than nothing vs., the actual Consititution.

They can do a Census like this, but its literally worthless. MAGA doesn't mind wasting money though.

'Shall not be infringed', actual Constitution. Try harder.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

So where does the Constitution mention counting foreign invaders smart guy?

It does not...but also, your attempt to label illegals as 'foreign invaders' is contrived--to the point that I highly doubt that the SCOTUS will buy it.
The Constitution does not, in fact, mandate counting only citizens for purposes of apportionment.
All free persons.
No matter how hard you try...I doubt that you can get to where you want to be without an amendment.

 

[Zincwarrior]

'Shall not be infringed', actual Constitution. Try harder.

Your statement makes no sense to either my post or the topic. But you be you.

 

[Zincwarrior]

It does not...but also, your attempt to label illegals as 'foreign invaders' is contrived--to the point that I highly doubt that the SCOTUS will buy it.
The Constitution does not, in fact, mandate counting only citizens for purposes of apportionment.
All free persons.
No matter how hard you try...I doubt that you can get to where you want to be without an amendment.

It would have counted prisoners of war too actually...

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

All people have to be counted. Do non citizens count when figuring out congressional seats?

Yes.
At the moment, census data is used for apportionment--how many representatives a state gets.
It also is used for determining the number of Electoral votes a state has in US Presidential elections.

 

[1srelluc]

You are cute. It includes those bound. The only exception is slaves-hence the term "Free." You lose MAGA.

Negative....I put illegals in their proper place as all Americans should....Invaders, pure and simple.

Any faux status they have is just given to them by states/localities illegally when they disregard the Constitution by harboring them.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

i'D LOVE A CONVENTION. It would wipe out state based representation, restrict the Power of the Executive back to what it was meant to be, add a balanced budget requirement. Noice!

A convention would be the end of the US.
As a country, we simply would not agree.
On anything...except that the other guys are fucked up~

 

[Rogue AI]

I do not..and have never....speak for 'Liberals'. That's some stupid shit that you guys transfer to my posts so you can fit your knee-jerk responses to the issues.

As for the Constitution..I support, and I always have supported, the 'living document' interpretation of the US Constitution.

However, no matter how hard I squint, I can't see this issue as being subject to any 'alternative' interpretation.

An amendment is the legal answer...same as with birthright citizenship.

You can't get more liberal than the 'living' document interpretation. That whole line of BS is designed to destroy the very idea of the Founders intent.

 

[martybegan]

i'D LOVE A CONVENTION. It would wipe out state based representation, restrict the Power of the Executive back to what it was meant to be, add a balanced budget requirement. Noice!

The smaller States would never give up State based representation, it's the whole basis of Federalism.

I don't want a parliamentary system, and neither do 3/4 of the States.

You think blue States like Connecticut and Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maryland and others would give up their two Senators?

 

[martybegan]

A convention would be the end of the US.
As a country, we simply would not agree.
On anything...except that the other guys are fucked up~

The left has more to fear from a convention because while they control the larger density of people in certain areas, the right has control of more States in general.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Negative....I put illegals in their proper place as all Americans should....Invaders, pure and simple.

Any faux status they have is just given to them by states/localities illegally when they disregard the Constitution by harboring them.

Constitution says otherwise and doesn't care what you do. I know thats a mere hindrance for MAGA now.

 

[Zincwarrior]

The smaller States would never give up State based representation, it's the whole basis of Federalism.

I don't want a parliamentary system, and neither do 3/4 of the States.

You think blue States like Connecticut and Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maryland and others would give up their two Senators?

If you have a convention all bets are off. Thats how we got the Constitution. we had a Confederacy before. So, yes, lets do this.

 

[Oddball]

Apparently, Trumpsters will howl over the very notion of following the Constitution and its mandates~

The only ***** you shitlibs give about the Constitution, is for using the vagaries of its language as a means to circumvent and usurp it...So spare us your cynical piety.

 

[Oddball]

Constitution says otherwise and doesn't care what you do. I know thats a mere hindrance for MAGA now.

ibid

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

The left has more to fear from a convention because while they control the larger density of people in certain areas, the right has control of more States in general.

..And if the Blue states refuse to ratify?
Civil War.
..And if the Red states refuse to ratify?
Civil War.
The almost certain result of a Constitutional convention?
Civil war.

The Blue states would fail to ratify the 2nd amendment.
The Red states would refuse to enshrine Right to choose.

Enter the Balkanization of the former United States, leading to, you guessed it...Civil War.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Democrats tried to use illegals to replace populations they lost in their states. They opened the border and created sanctuary cities to attract them to their states to replace citizens who got sick of the high taxes, crime homeless, poor schools and houses they cant afford.
So what happened illegals increased crime lowered wages and drove up housing costs and taxes.
View attachment 1146038

You have to go by the rule book, the US Constitution. "It is not fair," is not an excuse or reason.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

The only ***** you shitlibs give about the Constitution, is for using the vagaries of its language as a means to circumvent and usurp it...So spare us your cynical piety.

Now that's some funny shit.
You probably haven't noticed--but that is pretty much all that Trump has been doing since he took office, "using the vagaries of its language as a means to circumvent and usurp it."

 

[martybegan]

..And if the Blue states refuse to ratify?
Civil War.
..And if the Red states refuse to ratify?
Civil War.
The almost certain result of a Constitutional convention?
Civil war.

The Blue states would fail to ratify the 2nd amendment.
The Red states would refuse to enshrine Right to choose.

Enter the Balkanization to the former United States, leading to, you guessed it...Civil War.

so just sit around and let the current crap keep festering until we reach the same point?

This would be to propose amendments, not like going from the Articles to the Constitution.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

We dont have to all we need is bill which is in the house. Person means legal voters not illegal invaders. The SC can also rule on it and since the GOP is in control expect illegals not to be counted assuming any are still her in 2030

Not how it is done. The SC will not rule on it.