Exclude Illegal Aliens From Census?

The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to review a Trump administration effort to exclude illegal aliens from the 2020 census count that is used to apportion congressional seats.

In an unsigned order the justices set a Nov. 30 date to hear oral arguments from the parties.

A three-judge panel in a New York district court in September ruled that Trump’s memorandum excluding illegal aliens from congressional apportionment count was an illegal overreach of the president’s authority as delegated by Congress. The judges on that panel declared the memo, which was issued on July 21, as unlawful and subsequently blocked it from being implemented.

It boils down to this; should people in the US illegally be counted in the census for the purpose of the reapportionment of Congress members following the 2020 census.

What do you think?

beckyromero · 36-40, F

[quote]should people in the US illegally be counted in the census for the purpose of the reapportionment of Congress members following the 2020 census.[/quote]

Quite simply, yes.

That is if you wish to follow the U.S. Constitution.

Original Text:

[quote]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.[/quote]

Slaves were the "three fifths of all other Persons." The 14th Amendment decreed that all persons "born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

So, no more "three-fifths" accounting for slaves in the Census.

Undocumented immigrants are not slaves; they are "free Persons."

And the 14th Amendment makes it again makes it clear to count "persons."

[quote]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.[/quote]

It makes a point to [b]ONLY[/b] exclude "Indians not taxed."

Nor does it say to count only "citizens."

You so-called strict-constructionalists are always crying about wanting to go by what the Constitution says. Then when something is clear as crystal it's "But what it really means is..."

SomeMichGuy · M

@Budwick No he is a historian of the Constitution & Revolution.

Doesn't mean he cannot raise valid historical points, and a true originalist would welcome this viewpoint.

Budwick · 70-79, M

@SomeMichGuy Yeah, from what I know of the guy, he's been studying ways to try and alter what the founders meant for decades now.

So, unless he can sell his snake oils to the court, what he has to say is meaningless anyway.