Discussion: Supreme Court To Take Up Census Citizenship Case

Sucks that the epitaph for the US will be “5-4.”

24 Likes

Are you KIDDING me? This subverting of the Judicial system or ‘court picking’ is pissing me off. I’m SO ready to march on Washington. We’re watching you Roberts…worry about your legacy NOW.

21 Likes

The cold wind blows
in the
Ides of February.

2 Likes

Sounds like the case is already decided.

4 Likes

Here’s my epitaph for democracy in the USA:

1789-2019.
We had a nice run.

3 Likes

There are a lot of features in our Constitution designed to prevent the tyranny of the majority. Republicans have apparently figured out how to turn those features on their head in favor of the tyranny of the minority.

16 Likes

Everyone knows how this will end, with a 5 to 4 decision against America.

That is we do not have a conservative Supreme Court but a Republican Supreme Court that holds every ruling to the standard of what is good for the Republican Party and the constitution and America be damned.

18 Likes

The outcome is already decided, but the window dressing of legal analysis is probably still up for debate.

1 Like

We know which 3 voted to hear the case from the article - Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas. I’m betting the 4th was the beer swilling rapist.

10 Likes

@pb

We never had a democracy from the start. The “Founding Fathers” designed the government to keep wealthy white men in power. The Senate majority represents about 20% of the population, mostly from white rural states. Two of the last three presidents were selected by the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote.

Those 2 Presidents have appointed 4 wealthy white men to to Supreme Court, all so-called “Strict Constructionists.” How do you think they’re going to vote on this?

We need a revolution.

No democracy, no justice.

5 Likes

This is how a Party representing a minority of people and supporting unpopular legislation is able to maintain its grip on power, once elected.

It’s a vicious, non virtuous cycle. Corrupt billionaires and corporations have handpicked their legislators, who in turn, have handpicked the Judiciary. And the fix is in.

Is it so surprising that at every turn, SCOTUS rules in a manner that’s maximally beneficial to the established wealthy and powerful?

12 Likes

Curious about the redistricting effects of this. Take Texas. It has 16.7% foreign born or 4.5 million people. 35.4% are naturalized citizens.That leaves 2.9 million non citizens out of a population of 28.3 million. The average congressional district has about 700k residents. So this is about the size of 4 congressional districts. Is Texas really better off with 4 fewer members of Congress? If you draw districts based on citizenship alone and not total population, doesn’t that mean fewer districts for Texas? Are GOPers going to be happy with 4 less EVs? In addition, how is it possible to draw 32 (as opposed to 36 districts) without encompassing more Democratic friendly urban and suburban populations in those districts? That’s where the population is growing and that population is becoming more Dem. Would this not create more winnable purple districts?. Despite Swiss army knifing TX districts over the past decade, the GOP lost 2 seats and could lose 2-3 more in 2020. The other thing is where do the undocumented live? For example, if they’re all in Dan Crenshaw’s Harris County district, doesn’t his district get wiped out and get absorbed in to Lizzie Fletcher’s district? In addition, wouldn’t the Dems just push immigrants to become naturalized citizens, thereby adding more voters to the rolls who are more Dem leaning?

I just don’t think people have thought this through.

24 Likes

Can’t they save the taxpayers time and money and just issue the 5-4 vote in favor of Trump now?

Can just write “neener-neener-neener” as the decision and we can all move on.

2 Likes

All their “solutions” involve cutting off their noses to spite their faces. It goes with the territory when they build their entire ideology on aggrievement and retaliation against perceived slights.

6 Likes

I was freaked out about this, until I learned that NY and the 18 states behind it, also argued for Supreme Court review. I don’t understand why they did this, but is puts a slightly different spin on it.

This will all come down to Roberts, and a VERY UGLY record for Trump. Is Roberts going to sign onto a bogus hack job of a decision by Ross? My guess is no, because Ross was so ugly in how he violated the APA. Had he been more careful I might think the decision would have been different.

Roberts is clearly - and appropriately - concerned about the Court’s legitimacy at this point, as it appears the Country’s politics are going further off the rails. He does not want the Court in the firing line.

9 Likes

I think their part was mostly about the timing. We’re running out of it.

And if the Supremes do the expected 5-4 racist finding, it’s to the advantage of States to have as much time as possible to advertise to folks that ICE won’t be rounding them up if they check that box, as it’s illegal for the Census Bureau to share their data with law enforcement (not that it won’t probably happen…).

No, stay freaked out.

2 Likes

I think the term with more currency is “court-shopping.”

4 Likes

We announce defeat quite colorfully and snidely.

On the other hand, there is always a wrinkle people can use to help themselves…notice the word “help”…which implies DOING something

Headstones usually list the date of death, not the date a fatal illness took a decisive turn.

The more accurate end-date would be whatever year the 2020 census results become available, which IIRC would be like… 2021 or 2022.