New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Federal judge writes law that halts Trump's citizenship question on census.!!

Judge says trump acted in "bad faith".!!!! To a liberal judge, that is a legal argument.!!!

http://southwestdutchess.dailyvoice...-faith-by-adding-citizenship-question/739413/

july 4 2018 Citing “bad faith,” a federal judge has ordered President Donald Trump’s administration to disclose additional information regarding its decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

Judge Jesse Furman of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York announced on Tuesday that lawyers representing the government must produce a log of documents that were being withheld, as well as provide an explanation for why the administration did so.

In March, the Commerce Department announced it would reintroduce the citizenship question, which had been asked until 1960.

According to a Washington Times report, Furman, an Obama appointee, said Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross initially claimed that he added the question at the request of the Justice Department was undercut by his recent admission that he was thinking about it even before then.
 
Judge decision was most likely based on the fact he did not the progressive Nazi kooks to throw a brick thru his office window or have him and his staff harassed at restaurants and such.

All part of the progressive Nazi (aka Socialst/Dems) kook resistance
 
Most people don't know it but in deciding how many representatives a state has in the House, what counts is number of residents not citizens. Yes - illegal invaders count same as real americans. This needs to change and that's why it's important to know who is illegal.
 
36277954_10214840753585208_7329911523747299328_n.jpg
American Patriots not voting for it
 
Judges don't write laws. What this judge did was issue a legal finding that the Trump administration was breaking the law and ordering it to comply.

HAHAHA. You mean the constitution says they can't write laws. But they do it all the time. Look at roe v wade and plyler v doe. THINK
 
Census questions are not for judges to decide. Why do you want UNELECTED JUDGES running america.? THINK

Again, the judge made no decision on whether the question will be included. The judge will now apply the law and decide the case. That’s what happens under our system of government.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...hip-question-census-new-york-court/index.html

Try to pay attention and avoid your misleading right wing echo chamber screeds.
 
NO - roe v wade and plyler v doe are perfect examples of judges just making stuff up. What laws were the judges applying.??
Roe was actually a very specific ruling (a 7-2 ruling at that) on a specific TX law. It essentially made doctor/patient confidentiality a constitutional right applicable to abortion decisions.
 
Judges don't write laws. What this judge did was issue a legal finding that the Trump administration was breaking the law and ordering it to comply.
OH. And what law would that be. This question used to be on the census. No law has taken it off or changed that. So What law is the Trump Administration breaking????
 
Last edited:
OH. And what law would that be. This question used to be on the census. No law has taken it off or changed that. So What law is the Trump Administration breaking????

Political correctness. Liberal federal leftovers from the Obama administration simply act as roadblocks to getting anything done. They did the same thing here in Wisconsin with anything and everything Walker did. It took years of litigation before the liberal judges stay was overturned...virtually every time.

Just like with the travel ban, which the supreme court found constitutional after a liberal Obama holdover put a stay on it, anything that Trump does is going to have to be fought for in court.
 
OH. And what law would that be. This question used to be on the census. No law has taken it off or changed that. So What law is the Trump Administration breaking????

Laws requiring transparency and a stated purpose for administrative rule changes.
 
Roe was actually a very specific ruling (a 7-2 ruling at that) on a specific TX law. It essentially made doctor/patient confidentiality a constitutional right applicable to abortion decisions.

Specific TX law. They why did the ruling apply to the whole country???

And roe v wade had nothing to do with confidentiality. Nor should it. That's a legislative matter as is the whole question of whether abortion should be legal. THINK
 
Back
Top