in the Administrative Procedures Act , a law laying out the rules when federal agencies like the Department of Commerce wish to adopt new regulations. The California and Maryland rulings, meanwhile, relied on both the APA and the constitution’s Enumeration Clause —an instruction to Congress to conduct an “actual enumeration” of everyone living in the country every ten years.
Judge Furman’s decision drew on evidence that Mr Ross came up with the Voting Rights Act justification belatedly and disingenuously. Mr Ross first expressed an interest in adding the question “shortly after his confirmation” as secretary of commerce in February 2017, Judge Furman wrote, when he discussed the matter with Steve Bannon, Mr Trump’s erstwhile adviser. The team then “pursued that goal vigorously for almost a year” with no evident concern for the Voting Rights Act.
The other two rulings against Mr Ross add a constitutional violation. “It is conservatively estimated”, Judge George Hazel wrote on April 5th, that adding a citizenship question will spur a “differential decline in self-response for households that contain a noncitizen [of] 5.8 percentage points” and “Hispanic self-response will decrease by a magnitude of approximately 8.7 percentage points”.
Is the Pope Catholic?
Are you asking me or...., i’ll Go with NO jic
No
Will we hear from, or see RBG ? WheresRuth
It is a census of United States citizens. It impacts representation in the House of Representatives. How can you not ask and get a solid and representative census?
Of more import than federal dollars and congressional seats is accurate data from which researchers analyze issues of sociology, economics, medicine, and other sciences. Very concerned Scotus will vote on political rather than research consequences of decision.