Jump to content

Court Blocks Trump Administration From Asking About Citizenship in Census


Recommended Posts

Quote

But while Mr. Ross’s violations were “egregious,” he said, there was not sufficient evidence to prove, as plaintiffs in the lawsuit had claimed, that he had deliberately sought to discriminate against noncitizens and minorities that were most likely to be affected by the citizenship question. In part, he said, that was because the Supreme Court had blocked the plaintiffs from taking sworn testimony from Mr. Ross about his actions.

That's odd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
8 hours ago, CitizenVectron said:

Of course they will. Personal privacy only matters to conservatives when it's an issue the Liberals are on the opposite side of.

 

What we have learned the past few decades are that conservatives only hold two permanent opinions:

  1. Lower taxes and reduce regulations
  2. Everything else opposite of liberals

Even reduced regulations is subject. They wouldn’t want to reduce regulations on say “adult” content. And while they are coming around little by little, they have been the largest voice against reduced regulations on marijuana. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, osxmatt said:

 

I think that's a great point, and was exactly my thought.

 

Doesn't Justice Department refuses to comply with subpoena really mean Bill Barr is refusing to comply with subpoena?

And the consequence of refusal to comply with a subpoena? Referral to DOJ.

 

Nothing matters! :twothumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

Even reduced regulations is subject. They wouldn’t want to reduce regulations on say “adult” content. And while they are coming around little by little, they have been the largest voice against reduced regulations on marijuana. 

Yeah, I think you could maybe specify it a bit. Maybe they only want to reduce regulations that hinder profits? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Anathema- said:

That's because, as far as I can tell, nobody's been stupid enough to outright defy a lawful subpoena from Congress.

 

The House held Holder in contempt, but they referred it to DOJ, and shockingly, Holder declined to prosecute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jason said:

 

The House held Holder in contempt, but they referred it to DOJ, and shockingly, Holder declined to prosecute.

 

Thanks for reminding me but also Darrell Issa was a fucking coward and house repubs knew they were bluffing. A contempt charge for failure to appear will be different. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Anathema- said:

 

Thanks for reminding me but also Darrell Issa was a fucking coward and house repubs knew they were bluffing. A contempt charge for failure to appear will be different. 

I'm not exactly brimming with confidence that house Dems will grow some stones here.

 

Where would these people be imprisoned? A federal facility (in other words, under the executive branch)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2019 at 3:01 PM, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

I'm not exactly brimming with confidence that house Dems will grow some stones here.

 

Where would these people be imprisoned? A federal facility (in other words, under the executive branch)?

They havn't jailed anyone in almost 100 years. The supreme court says they can't be a law enforcement body. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2019 at 2:42 PM, Anathema- said:

 

That's because, as far as I can tell, nobody's been stupid enough to outright defy a lawful subpoena from Congress.

Didn't Obamas administration ignore subpoenas all the time? Are we now going with defying a subpoena is bad? Did the board have a discussion about flip flopping on this issue? I don't remember that discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Snaynay1 said:

Didn't Obamas administration ignore subpoenas all the time? Are we now going with defying a subpoena is bad? Did the board have a discussion about flip flopping on this issue? I don't remember that discussion.

 

Once is now all the time? We had that discussion above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Snaynay1 said:

Didn't Obamas administration ignore subpoenas all the time? Are we now going with defying a subpoena is bad? Did the board have a discussion about flip flopping on this issue? I don't remember that discussion.

 

Your arguments are almost entirely disingenuous. Eric Holder ignoring one subpoena (which, I grant, was bad) because Republicans were dicking Obama's administration around on a bluff is not the same as what's happening here.

 

It's super weird I have to explain false equivocating and proportionality all the time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...