Common Sense and the Census

Far be it from me to question a federal judge, oh what am I saying, I’m definitely going to question a federal judge because yesterday’s decision in a Manhattan court may satisfy some quirks in the law, but it defies common sense.

You may have heard, U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman, an Obama appointee, ruled that the Trump administration must strike the question: Are you a citizen of the United States? from the 2020 census form.

Yep, a judge actually told the U. S. government it could not ask people living in the country if they are citizens. 

Even the judge admits that the question is constitutional. (It was on the census form until 1950.)

This case is headed for the Supreme Court.

I didn’t read the entire 277-page opinion - did you? - but I read enough of it to see that the judge dealt with questions that didn’t get to what most of us would consider the meat of the matter. He seemed deeply concerned with the motivation of the architect of the census form, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, and worried that frightened immigrants might shun the census.

That sidestepped the essential common-sense question: Why should states that defy federal immigration laws be rewarded with more power in Congress and showered with tax dollars?

Look, the Constitution requires a decennial census - an attempt to count every living person in the country - and federal funds and seats in the House of Representatives are apportioned accordingly.

In our republic, citizens vote for members of Congress who head to Washington to represent them there.

As states become more populous, they are awarded more members of the House.

Now, with some states - hello, California - adopting policies that encourage illegal immigration and with illegals pouring into those places, these renegade states are on track to be rewarded for their defiant behavior.

That’s not how this is supposed to work.

The ACLU and other open-borders groups object to the citizenship question because they say it will create fear and cause “immigrants” - they mean illegals - to skip the census. What they aren’t saying is that it might also mean that heavily Democratic parts of the country could lose federal funds and influence in Congress.

“A skewed undercount would understate the population of diverse states and deprive them of representation,” observed Vox.com on Tuesday.

Diverse states? Oh please. They’re sanctuary states. And why are illegal immigrants entitled to ANY representation in Congress?

It’s worth noting that everyone living in the country is required by federal law to complete a census form. But I guess one more broken law to people who snuck into the country or deliberately overstayed a visa doesn’t really matter.

Ever wondered why estimates of the illegal immigrant population in the US range from 11 million to 22 million? It’s because we have no effective way of counting the people who are here illegally. 

The 2020 census presents a unique opportunity to try to get a handle on the magnitude of the illegal immigration problem.

 Keep the question.