By Nancy Thorner -
John and Andy Schlafly, following in the footsteps of their late mother Phyllis Schlafly who wrote weekly commentaries spanning over a period of many years, wrote the following as their commentary of April 23, 2019, High Noon for Citizenship at High Court:
“It was high drama on Tuesday [April 23, 2019] at the Supreme Court as the Justices heard what many consider to be the most important case of the Term. At issue is whether the upcoming 2020 census will be allowed to include the following question: 'Is this person a citizen of the United States?'"
The census includes questions about race, sex, and age; whether a resident is a U.S. citizen is just as important as other demographic details. As Justice Brett Kavanaugh pointed out during oral argument, other countries routinely ask their residents about citizenship in a census.
Fellow Trump nominee Neil Gorsuch indicated his support for allowing the question about citizenship. Justice Alito seemed on board too, and Justice Thomas is expected to join this conservative bloc.
But liberals have created an uproar over this issue and questioning from the Left side of the Court was hostile and intense. Obama-appointed Justices Kagan and Sotomayor complained that the record compiled by the lower court did not support asking about citizenship.
At trial, an Obama-appointed judge named Jesse Furman impugned Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross for authorizing the citizenship question. The district judge declared that Ross had somehow “violated the public trust” by including this question, even though similar questions have been asked many times in the past.
Meaningless indeed, and potentially even worse than that, as a census which fails to ask about citizenship inflates the bona fide populations of California and New York, to the detriment of many other states.
That smear of Trump Cabinet member Ross was unfair, but the litigation machine on the Left have obtained additional federal court rulings to block President Trump’s citizenship question. No one can be deported for truthfully answering the question about citizenship on the census, but we would learn how many illegal residents there really are and where.
In the case simply captioned “Department of Commerce v. New York,” the Supreme Court showed signs of a 5-4 majority to overturn the trial verdict in New York against Secretary Ross and the Trump Administration. This could deliver by the end of June Trump’s biggest court victory of his presidency to date.
“Can you believe that the Radical Left Democrats want to do our new and very important Census Report without the all-important Citizenship Question,” Trump tweeted earlier this month. “Report would be meaningless and a waste of the $Billions (ridiculous) that it costs to put together!”
Meaningless indeed, and potentially even worse than that, as a census which fails to ask about citizenship inflates the bona fide populations of California and New York, to the detriment of many other states. Illegal aliens are counted in those states as though they were citizens, and New York and California soak up tax dollars this way.
Democrats brag that they won the popular vote in the last election, but they actually lost that vote in the 49 states outside of California. It is no coincidence that some of the most outspoken opponents of having a count that distinguishes between citizens and aliens include the attorney general of that vast sanctuary state.
Fewer lawful residents means less funding, and if illegals duck the census to avoid the question then this could reduce the numbers of Electoral College votes and congressmen for California and New York. Their influence would then shrink, and they would take fewer federal dollars in entitlements if the citizenship question is asked in the census.
Beneficiaries of including a citizenship question in the census would be all of American citizens who are entitled to full representation without dilution of their vote or their tax dollars. That includes middle America, also known as Trump Country.
The Department of Justice pointed out that an accurate count of citizens would even be helpful to enforcing the Voting Rights Act, to the benefit of minorities who are American citizens. But the Democrat leadership cares more about preserving their own political power, which counting citizens threatens.
Despite being a magnet for immigration, Democrat control of New York has driven away many citizens over the past decade. Between July 2017 and July 2018, New York State actually lost population, and population growth in California is below the national average.
Kris Kobach has long championed the inclusion of the citizenship question in the census, along with laws requiring proof of citizenship when registering to vote. Our nation should be governed by its citizens, not by people who reside illegally inside our borders.
Democrats fear that conservative states will use the census question to redraw their state legislative districts in proportion to who is a citizen, thereby reducing representation for urban areas boosted by the presence of illegal aliens. Justice Gorsuch alluded to this, which the Supreme Court allowed in Evenwel v. Abbott (2016).
Cities currently have an incentive, both financially and politically, to harbor illegal aliens. Better data on who is a citizen and who is not would help end that racket.”
Common sense should rule the day, not partisanship
The citizenship question on the census is nothing new, having appeared in some form or another on censuses throughout this nation's history,
First proposed in 1800 by Thomas Jefferson, who at the time advocated for an inquiry into “the respective numbers of native citizens, citizens of foreign birth, and of aliens", a version of Jefferson's question was added to the 1820 census requesting how many “foreigners not naturalized” lived in each household.
From 1820 to 1890 the citizenship question recurred multiple times; however, from 1890 to 1950 it appeared on every census. Since then the citizenship question, starting in 1970 until 2000, has been included on every long-form census questionnaire. To this day the question is still asked on the American Community Survey, an annual supplement to the decennial census. The citizenship question is not a new concept; it is the restoration of common sense.
Given that the Constitution requires a census every 10 years, a census seems the only way to get an accurate count of total population. Knowing how many U.S. and non-citizens live in this nation certainly seems critical to the democratic protections of our Constitution, especially given that the same has been collected throughout this nation's history. As the census is used to draw congressional districts, how else can voters of each state by assured they are adequately represented in Congress?
Worth noting is that the citizenship question does not ask about a person’s legal status; it merely asks about citizenship status and has nothing whatsoever to do with immigration enforcement. Federal law even prevents census data from being used for anything other than statistical analysis. That is the law and there is no evidence any agency intends to violate it.
State action ramps up
It's not surprising that the state of California has already sued to block the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 census and that New York's state attorney general has announced plans for a multistate lawsuit. The concern expressed by states with large undocumented immigrant populations, such as CA and NY, is that asking about citizenship will scare people off, forms won't get filled out and the count won't be accurate, affecting federal funding and the number of congressional seats.
Carl Lautenbach, in a June 19, 2019 report about Illinois, wrote how the state of IL and many municipal officials are doing everything they can to ensure every resident is counted in the upcoming U.S. Census, in part to ensure they get every dollar available.
“When Gov. J.B. Pritzker announced $29 million in state funding for the Census push was in his budget that begins next month, he made it clear that the stakes were high for Illinois.
"The stakes are high because States and local government receive federal grants and reimbursements for Medicaid spending and infrastructure needs based on formulas that take population into account. So far, states throughout the country have spent more than $130 million in state funds to ensure they’re maximizing their local population tallies, according to rollcall.com. California has budgeted $100 million for its Census effort.”
By the end of June, 2919, the Supreme Court is slated to decide if the 2020 nose counters will be allowed to ask whether or not the respondents are American citizens.
As my friend Burt Prelutsky, CA resident, screenwriter, newspaper columnist and author of 8 books wrote recently in one of his daily commentaries available through subscription only at [email protected]:
Predictably, Democrats are in a lather over this, as they are over so many things. They fear that a major segment of their fan base would find themselves on the proverbial hot seat. But, honestly, I can’t imagine why. I mean, it’s not as if they’ll be required to provide proof of citizenship, such as photo I.D.’s.
These are people, after all, who either snuck into the country or claimed asylum by falsely swearing they feared for their lives if returned to their homeland.
So, what’s one more lie?
