Trump orders new census that does NOT count illegal immigrants

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Then why did we get crap decisions like Plessey, Roe and Obergfell?

Roe and Obergefell were fine. You would have been in favor of Pleasy.

 

[drudge X]

..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.

We need another one.

 

[martybegan]

Roe and Obergefell were fine. You would have been in favor of Pleasy.

Roe and Obergfell were based on bullshit, same as Plessey.

Prove I would be in favor of Plessey.

 

[drudge X]

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."

Democrats have been doing that before Trump. It's nothing new. Attacking the First and Second Amendments is something Democrats are highly fond of doing.

 

[Rogue AI]

Here you go since you refuse to read your own Constitution.
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse [sic] three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

Way to ignore the parts you don't like. It's right there, in plain text, exceptions existed. Ask yourself, without an amendment, how are untaxed Indians counted now? That is why you loons will lose.

 

[Paleman]

I doubt that this is going to happen anytime soon--as it would face considerable Constitutional challenges.


The U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 2, Clause 3, states:



And the 14th Amendment, Section 2, reaffirms:



This includes citizens and non-citizens alike—legal permanent residents, visa holders, and undocumented immigrants.

The Supreme Court has never upheld an interpretation that allows the federal government to exclude non-citizens from the decennial census for purposes of apportionment. In fact, legal precedent affirms that:

All persons residing in the U.S. must be counted, regardless of citizenship status.

The U.S. Constitution mandates counting the “whole number of persons” in each state for apportionment.
This does not permit restricting the census count to only U.S. citizens.

Any attempt to exclude non-citizens would almost certainly face significant constitutional challenges and is inconsistent with existing legal interpretation.

OK, how about this approach? Go ahead and count all of the illegal rats running around our country and post that number for all to see just how bad this invasion is. Then, exclude those MILLIONS when Gerrymandering for political purposes. Constitution remains unmolested by the left.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

United States Constitution Amendment 14 Section 2:
"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. "

That will need a Constitutional amendment.

WW

since it says excluding Indians not taxed that can be applied to illegals not taxed.

 

[22lcidw]

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.

Over a long period of years of their insurrections, showing the flags of the nations they are from is evident as foreign invaders. Nations with borders is an inconvenient truth you guys deny. It is a reality that we all need to wake up to.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

Way to ignore the parts you don't like. It's right there, in plain text, exceptions existed. Ask yourself, without an amendment, how are untaxed Indians counted now? That is why you loons will lose.

There are no 'untaxed Indians' anymore.
With a few exceptions, Native Americans are subject to the same taxes as anyone else.

BTW..Native American are Citizens.

This is why you loons will lose..

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

since it says excluding Indians not taxed that can be applied to illegals not taxed.

Pretty stupid, considering that illegals ARE taxed, for the most part.
Certainly, they all pay sales tax yes? If they own property, they pay property tax.
If they have a job, all the applicable taxes apply...with the bonus that most dare not collect tax refunds, social security or unemployment..so all that revenue is 'found money' to the US.

 

[Rogue AI]

There are no 'untaxed Indians' anymore.
With a few exceptions, Native Americans are subject to the same taxes as anyone else.

BTW..Native American are Citizens.

This is why you loons will lose..

I know you folks love to tax anything and everything, but really, taxing Indian child just so you can count them seems cruel and unusual. Or perhaps you need to look a little deeper and think this through.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

I know you folks love to tax anything and everything, but really, taxing Indian child just so you can count them seems cruel and unusual. Or perhaps you need to look a little deeper and think this through.

Well..the day is young..but that's the stupidest thing I've seen posted thus far.

Perhaps YOU need to think this through?

 

[cnm]

Liberals will howl at the very notion of the government serving the interest of the People over their foreign pets.

I enjoy the way MAGAts swear by their love of the US Constitution until it's read to them.

Enumeration Clause

www.law.cornell.edu

​

 

[Edgetho]

I doubt that this is going to happen anytime soon--as it would face considerable Constitutional challenges.


The U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 2, Clause 3, states:



And the 14th Amendment, Section 2, reaffirms:



This includes citizens and non-citizens alike—legal permanent residents, visa holders, and undocumented immigrants.

The Supreme Court has never upheld an interpretation that allows the federal government to exclude non-citizens from the decennial census for purposes of apportionment. In fact, legal precedent affirms that:

All persons residing in the U.S. must be counted, regardless of citizenship status.

The U.S. Constitution mandates counting the “whole number of persons” in each state for apportionment.
This does not permit restricting the census count to only U.S. citizens.

Any attempt to exclude non-citizens would almost certainly face significant constitutional challenges and is inconsistent with existing legal interpretation.

When the 14th was written there were only 37 States in The Union. But many Territories.

The question of citizenship was never raised unless you were a citizen of another Country. In which case, you weren't counted.

Hundreds of Thousands of people occupied the Territories. With no allegiance to any Country other than The United States. They weren't ALL, strictly speaking, Citizens of the United States but came under the jurisdiction of the United States.

The Census counted them.

The topic of who, and who is not counted in the Census has been glossed over by a very, VERY Lazy SCOTUS. The Founding Fathers never intended for us to count people that are here ILLEGALLY. Never. Mostly because, back then, NOBODY was here illegally. We welcomed everybody. The people sneaking into our Country today are the ancestors of those who declined to be here 150 years ago. We never intended to count illegals when the Constitution and the 14th were written because it never really came up. There was no such thing back then.

 

[postman]

Roe and Obergfell were based on bullshit, same as Plessey.

Prove I would be in favor of Plessey.

Class warfare.

 

[Rogue AI]

Well..the day is young..but that's the stupidest thing I've seen posted thus far.

Perhaps YOU need to think this through?

That was a joke, yet you missed the point. No surprise. Exceptions existed, taxed Indians vs untaxed Indians, neither defined in the Constitution itself. How did untaxed Indians become taxed and counted Indians without an amendment? See where this is going yet? If not, don't bother continuing.

 

[whitehall]

It makes sense. If you are illegally in someone's home it doesn't mean you are part of the family.

 

[cnm]

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

Of course 'person' traditionally has been held to be able to mean 'slave' too. So I hope it's your own arse you're pulling your shit from.

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Fugitive_Slave_Clause​

The Fugitive Slave Clause in the United States Constitution, also known as either the Slave Clause or the Fugitives From Labor Clause, [1][2][3][4] is Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3, which requires a "Person held to Service or Labour" (usually a slave, apprentice, or indentured servant)​

 

[Rogue AI]

I enjoy the way MAGAts swear by their love of the US Constitution until it's read to them.

Enumeration Clause

www.law.cornell.edu

​

Do you have some point that pertains to me?

 

[postman]

Way to ignore the parts you don't like. It's right there, in plain text, exceptions existed. Ask yourself, without an amendment, how are untaxed Indians counted now? That is why you loons will lose.

The Census Bureau collects data for the American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) population and publishes specific counts, estimates, and statistics. My Tribal Area gives you quick and easy access to selected statistics from the American Community Survey (ACS).

the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924