Of course, Census citizenship question matters*

July 6, 2019

U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts mimics Sandra Day O’Connor, Anthony Kennedy as swing vote

On Friday, the Justice Department said it will continue researching for legal grounds to include a citizenship question on the 2020 Census. Earlier President Trump said he is “very seriously” considering an executive order to get the question on the form.

Although the Dems are hard at work attempting to politicize it, the issue of incorporating the citizenship question on the U.S. Census form, has far reaching ramifications that affect us all.

Congressional districts are apportioned based on the number of voting citizens as opposed to residents.

The Hill released the findings of a Hill-HarrisX survey conducted in late April, showing 60% of Americans support having the citizenship question included on the census form. Support cut across all demographics.

The U.S. Census Bureau explains the history of place of birth, citizenship, year of entry questions, noting the citizenship question originated with the 1820 Census, place of birth originated with the 1850 Census, and year of entry originated with the 1890 Census. In 2005, the USCB transferred to the American Community Survey replacing the decennial census long form.

The citizenship question should not be controversial. Most nations ask it, including Mexico and Canada. The United Nations recommends the practice. The United States previously asked about citizenship as well, but since 1950 the question has not been included in the census forms that most people receive. (A much longer, more detailed questionnaire sent to a small sample of households chosen at random includes the question, which has not previously been a hotly debated topic revving up the ACLU and Democrat presidential candidates until the advent of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Last week, a divided Supreme Court — with Chief Justice John Roberts disappointingly swinging left again and joining four Democrats — ruled that the Trump administration’s stated reason for including a question about citizenship on the 2020 census — to help the Department of Justice better enforce federal voting rights laws — was a pretext. The “evidence,” Chief Roberts wrote, “tells a story that does not match the explanation that” Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross provided. The case has been sent back to the Department of Commerce.

Justice Clarence Thomas, in a dissent joined by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, wrote that Ross’ decision “was legally sound and a reasoned exercise of his broad discretion.”

When his vote holds massive and long-ranging implications such as with the 2012 opinion upholding Obamacare, Roberts caves.

President Trump said his administration is exploring a number of legal options, including issuing an executive order which have been used by all presidents — with Bill Clinton topping the list at 364.

Take the single minute required to read, “Of Course the Census Should Ask a Citizenship Question,”* by Hans A. von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department lawyer, now Senior Legal Fellow with The Heritage Foundation.

Advertisements

Trump appointees to SCOTUS having major impact

June 23, 2019

The Daily Caller headlines its post by Kevin Daley, “Kagan Seethes As High Court Conservatives Deliver Property Rights Win.”

It contains less legalese than the SCOTUSblog, but they each cover this significant case and Justice Elena Kagan’s searing rebuke of her conservative colleagues, accusing them of smashing “a hundred-plus years of legal rulings to smithereens.”

The dissent noted Friday’s case was the second time this term that the conservative justices have overturned a controlling precedent, prompting Kagan to ask, forebodingly, which precedent the high court will overrule next.

“Just last month, when the Court overturned another longstanding precedent, Justice [Stephen] Breyer penned a dissent,” Kagan wrote. “He wrote of the dangers of reversing legal course ‘only because five members of a later Court’ decide that an earlier ruling was incorrect. He concluded: ‘Today’s decision can only cause one to wonder which cases the Court will overrule next.’”

“Well, that didn’t take long,” Kagan added. “Now one may wonder yet again.”

Kagan was referencing Breyer’s May dissent in Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, which asked whether states are immune from lawsuits in the courts of other states. In Hyatt, the five-justice conservative majority overturned a 1979 decision and said the states do indeed have sovereign immunity in the courts of their sister states.

Friday’s property rights dispute arose when a small town in Pennsylvania adopted an ordinance requiring that cemeteries “be kept open and accessible to the general public during daylight hours.” The town told Rose Mary Knick, whose 90-acre property includes a small family cemetery, that she must comply with the rule. Knick sued, saying the ordinance violates the takings clause of the Constitution. The takings clause says the government must compensate property owners for any land seized for public use.

 A 1985 Supreme Court case called Williamson County v. Hamilton Bank required Knick to seek compensation at the state level before going to federal court. Indeed, that ruling required Knick and plaintiffs like her to exhaust all possible state compensation remedies before turning to the federal judiciary.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said the Williamson County decision was wrong and Knick can go to a federal judge right away.

“Williamson County was not just wrong,” the chief wrote. “Its reasoning was exceptionally ill founded and conflicted with much of our takings jurisprudence.”

The Williamson County ruling, Roberts said elsewhere, imposes “an unjustifiable burden on takings plaintiffs, conflicts with the rest of our takings jurisprudence, and must be overruled. A property owner has an actionable Fifth Amendment takings claim when the government takes his property without paying for it.”

The chief justice noted the Court considers several factors when deciding to overrule a prior decision. In that connection, he cited the 2018 Janus v. AFSCME decision, which said government unions cannot force non-members to pay so-called agency fees. The citation to Janus drew a sharp rebuke from Kagan.

“If that is the way the majority means to proceed — relying on one subversion of stare decisis to support another — we may as well not have principles about precedents at all,” Kagan wrote. “Stare decisis” is a Latin legal term meaning “to stand by things decided.” Janus overturned the 1977 Abood v. Detroit Board of Education ruling.

Friday’s case is No. 17-647, Knick v. Township of Scott.

This was the Aug. 5, 2010 senate roll call vote on Elena Kagen’s confirmation.


AZ Fed. Dist. Judge becomes less lenient re: illegals

June 5, 2019

Back in 2005, there were few rational Arizona taxpayers who supported U.S. District Judge Raner C. Collins’ order imposing an astronomical penalty of $500,000 a day on the state if it failed to comply with his directive to “properly fund” English-language programs for Spanish-speaking students in the Tucson Unified School District. There were ESL (English as a second language) programs in place but they weren’t expansive enough to suit Collins.

In the intervening years, and newly on senior status, the Clinton appointee to the Federal District bench, has apparently mellowed. Based in Tucson, a major portal for illegals, Judge Collins has first-hand experience of the results of blatant disregard for our laws and sovereign border.

Fast forward to June 4, 2019 and we find Judge Collins in no mood to grant leniency to a facilitator and harborer of illegal aliens who unlawfully invaded the United States.

The Periódico de la República de Arizona (Arizona Republic) which refers to illegals a meremigrants” or “undocumented immigrants,” expands the English language even further to designate defendant Scott Warren “a humanitarian aid volunteer,” working with the group No More Deaths. The simple answer to halting desert deaths in the extreme summer heat, is to stay home. The newspaper reporter dramatically refers to the desert as “vast and deadly.”

Warren, 36, arrested by Border Patrol Agents in January 2018, is being prosecuted for his crime and could face up to 20 years in prison on three felony charges. Additionally, he faces misdemeanor charges of trespassing. During the trial it was revealed Warren has been in communication with a Phoenix activist who gained notoriety for leading caravans of invaders through Mexico to the U.S. border last year.

Based on the illegals’ statements, Warren had given them meals, clothing and provided them a place to sleep. Whether he gently patted their furrowed brows, sang them lullabies and tucked them in as they rested was not specified.

Attorneys for Warren previously filed two motions to dismiss the charges against him. Last week, Judge Collins denied both motions, allowing the felony trial to proceed.

Bravo! Judge Collins!

Following the newspaper’s deceptively worded account is this solicitation exhibiting sheer desperation: “Have any news tips or story ideas about the U.S.-Mexico border? Reach the reporter…(listing his email and twitter account). Support local journalism. Subscribe to azcentral.com today.”


Illegal alien impregnates 11-year-old Phoenix girl

May 26, 2019

Just another illegal coming to do what Americans refuse to do*

In these politically correct times, the local newspaper no longer provides the citizenship of arrested and charged criminals. Nevertheless, we’d like to introduce you to a sterling hunk of a guy.  At 5’4’ and weighing in at 130 lbs., there’s no doubt 20-year-old Carlos Jacinto Cobo-Perez is a sought after Romeo. The problem is he’s been romancing a child. Although he admitted to authorities that he knew it was wrong, he couldn’t contain his overwhelming lust for an 11-year-old, who is now pregnant. His bond has been set at $150,000.

Ironically, the girl’s pregnancy was confirmed at Phoenix Children’s Hospital.

As to his citizenship…with a bit of resourceful searching we found that in addition to the child sex charge, the pedophile also faces illegal immigration charges, a fact the Periódico de la República de Arizona (Arizona Republic) is unwilling to report. During his initial appearance, Cobo-Perez, who is obviously also a jokester, asked the judge if he would sign his Order of Deportation. Count on this Carlos: That won’t be happening.

According to the victim’s mother, the family reported Cobo-Perez to Phoenix police three times prior to the pregnancy — initially when she first saw a hickey on her little girl’s neck. They “didn’t do anything,” she said.

In a related matter, U.S. District Court Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. of the Northern District of California, on Friday ruled against President Trump. The issue was the completion of a portion of border fence. Gilliam was nominated to the court in 2014 by Barack Obama.

Federal election records reveal Gilliam donated $6,900 to Obama’s campaign for president…$4,600 to Obama for America and $2,300 to the Obama Victory Fund. Barack Obama’s commitment to open borders and amnesty for illegals is well documented.

*The Left’s frequently repeated refrain is, “These are just good people coming to take the jobs Americans refuse to take.”


Terrorist’s short term, early release, should be inconceivable

May 23, 2019

In 1953, turning on your country was a crime punishable by death. Ethel, 35, and Julius Rosenberg, 37, the parents of two young sons, were charged with conspiracy to commit espionage.

On March 29, 1951 the couple was found guilty of spying on behalf of the Soviet Union, and were executed in the electric chair on June 19, 1953, although the evidence against Ethel was weak.

Fast forward to 2019. John Walker Lindh, 38, a Californian who converted to Islam at age 16, provided support to the Taliban. He became known as the “American Taliban” after his battlefield capture in Afghanistan in November 2001, where he was fighting with the Afghan Taliban two months after the 9/11 attacks.

On February 5, 2002, Lindh was indicted by a federal grand jury on ten charges of conspiracy, including conspiracy to murder U.S. citizens and providing material support and resources to terrorist organizations. He could have received up to three life sentences and 90 additional years in prison.

Instead, Lindh, who now uses the name Abu Sulayman al-Irland, has preposterously been granted an early release from a federal prison after being sentenced to a paltry 20 years. Lindh is getting out 3 years early for “good behavior,” though his actions resulted in American deaths.

In 2010 Lindh and a Syrian-American prisoner, represented by the ACLU, sued to lift restrictions on group prayer by Muslim inmates. U.S. District Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson, an Obama appointee, ruled in their favor, saying that the government had shown no compelling interest in restricting the religious speech of the inmates by prohibiting them from praying together.

According to an internal report by the National Counterterrorism Center, Lindh told a visiting television news producer that he had not renounced extremist violence and continues to advocate for global jihad, saying, “ISIS,” the terrorist group that beheaded Americans, “is doing a spectacular job.”

The burning question is, what can we expect next as this America-hater is free?


Pres. Trump’s legal shakedown from Dem DC judge

May 21, 2019

Obama appointed Judge upholds Dem subpoena for president’s tax records

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta issued this 41-page order in favor of the U.S. House of Representatives Ways and Means Oversight sub-committee* seeking President Donald Trump’s personal and business tax records from his accounting firm, Mazars USA LLP.

The flamboyant opinion filled with inflammatory quotes, opens with an 1860 statement of protest from President James Buchanan which Mehta parallels to President Trump, writing, “Some 160 years later, President Donald J. Trump has taken up the fight of his predecessor.” Mehta gives cover to the partisan committee writing, it “has shown that it is not engaged in a pure fishing expedition for the President’s financial records,” disingenuously adding that “the documents might assist Congress in passing laws and performing other core functions.”

“Might”? In Mehta’s convoluted, partisan thinking, that meets a sufficient legal standard.

Judge Mehta also denied a request to stay his decision pending an appeal. Additionally, Mehta provocatively asserted that Congress can investigate President Trump without beginning formal impeachment proceedings.

These are the Judges on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia:

District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan (appointed by Bill Clinton: 1994)

District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly (Bill Clinton: 1997)

District Judge James E. Boasberg (Barack Obama: 2011)

District Judge Amy Berman Jackson (Barack Obama: 2011)

District Judge Rudolph Contreras (Barack Obama: 2012)

District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson (Barack Obama: 2013)

District Judge Christopher R. Cooper (Barack Obama: 2014)

District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan (Barack Obama: 2014)

District Judge Randolph D. Moss (Barack Obama: 2014)

District Judge Amit P. Mehta (Barack Obama: 2014)

District Judge Timothy J. Kelly (Donald Trump: 2017)

District Judge Trevor N. McFadden (Donald Trump: 2017)

District Judge Dabney L. Friedrich (Donald Trump: 2017)

 

* Scroll through to see the committee members and their party affiliations.


Janet Napolitano drops “Big Sis” guise, becomes “Big Bro”*

April 26, 2019

Issues directive requiring California universities to quarantine students and staff unable to prove they were vaccinated against measles

Janet Napolitano —- formerly Arizona’s radically left-wing governor who took a midterm hike to ineffectively head the Department of Homeland Security for Barack Obama —- is currently the president of the University of California system. 

Longtime Arizonans rate her as the undisputed worst governor in memory. Wielding her veto pen in a manic rage over bills passed through the GOP controlled state legislature, she earned the nickname “J-No.”

Lax leftist Napolitano, bonded to an open border policy, was renowned for her dismissively blasé retort when frustrated Arizonans pleaded for border security: “Show me a 50-foot fence, and I’ll show you a 51-foot ladder.”

Called “Big Sis,” for her ham-handed tactcs, Napolitano has now fully morphed into “Big Bro,” mandating that California universities quarantine students and staff who are unable to prove they were vaccinated against measles. CBS 2 Los Angeles carries the full report.

Years preceding the shameful attempts to keep Judge Brett Kavanaugh from being confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court, Napolitano was integral to the attempt to defame Clarence Thomas as he was put through a brutal hearing prior to his confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court nearly three decades ago.  A black, conservative justice was more than the left could tolerate. Napolitano represented Anita Hill, who suddenly recalled offensive comments she attributed to Thomas —- though she inexplicably continued to follow Thomas, who vigorously denied her charges, from job to job.

It’s a sure bet there are few who miss “Big Bro/J-No” but for those who have a hankering to see her, she has authored a book targeting President Trump as a bigot for enacting national security measures. She will be reviewing it and signing copies next month for a mere $45 fee.

Using these printable coupons, treat yourself and take a few guests out to dinner at Red Lobster for the same amount.  Crab or lobsters and shrimp, even with their antenna intact, are easier on the eyes than Janet Napolitano any day of the week.

Here she is with her gal-pal Kyrsten Sinema out for a night on the town a few years ago.

*“Big Brother is watching you,” was the warning that appears on posters throughout Oceania, the fictional dictatorship described by George Orwell in his book titled, “1984.”