AG Barr rules that Trump Regime can ignore Supreme Court rulings by executive fiat, add citizenship question to census.

[The Romulan Republic]

https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... -to-census

Attorney General William Barr said Monday that he believes the Trump administration can legally add a citizenship question to the 2020 census, though the Supreme Court ruled against its inclusion last month.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Barr said he has been in regular contact with President Trump about the question, which the president is determined to see featured on the decennial survey.

“I agree with him that the Supreme Court decision was wrong,” Barr told the AP. The attorney general added that he thinks there is “an opportunity potentially to cure the lack of clarity that was the problem and we might as well take a shot at doing that.”

Barr declined to provide further details to the wire service on how the question will be added to the census.

However, the AP cited a senior official who said President Trump is expected to issue a presidential memorandum to the Commerce Department directing it to include the citizenship question on the 2020 census. Action is expected to be taken in the coming days.

The Hill has reached out to the Justice and Commerce departments for further comment.

The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling last month, found that the administration's stated reason for adding the citizenship question to the census didn’t match up with the evidence in the case.

The justices blocked the question from appearing on the survey for the time being but left an opening for the Commerce Department to provide another reason for the question’s inclusion. The Trump administration had claimed the question was necessary to enforce the Voting Rights Act.

Opponents of the question argued that its inclusion on the census would lead to an inaccurate count of the population, as immigrants might be discouraged from participating. The Department of Justice (DOJ) had argued that the data would not be used for purposes beyond compliance with the voting law, but critics said the perception was enough to cause individuals to skip the question or the survey altogether.

The DOJ initially appeared ready to accept defeat in the legal battles, announcing Tuesday that census materials would be printed without the question. The administration had said in court filings that census materials needed to be finalized by June 30 for a July 1 printing deadline.

But Trump one day later tweeted that those efforts would move forward, appearing to catch even DOJ lawyers on the case by surprise.

“The tweet this morning was the first I had heard of the president's position on this issue, just like the plaintiffs and Your Honor. I do not have a deeper understanding of what that means at this juncture other than what the president has tweeted,” Joshua Gardner, a DOJ attorney, told a federal judge during a teleconference Wednesday.

“But obviously, as you can imagine, I am doing my absolute best to figure out what's going on,” he added.

The DOJ also announced late Sunday that it was pulling its entire legal team for the citizenship question off the case, and replacing them with other government lawyers.

That move has fueled speculation that career DOJ lawyers refused to provide another rationale behind the citizenship question after repeatedly citing the Voting Rights Act in court or that officials feared they would no longer be viewed as trustworthy by judges presiding over the cases.

But remember, we can't impeach, because it would be too divisive.

So, can we all stop beating around the bush and officially start calling the US a dictatorship now?

[Solauren]

In order for the US to qualify as a dictatorship, Trump would have to retain power past the next schedueled election, via means other then winning the election. i.e military force, legal trickery.

At this point, the US is still a democracy, just very disfunctional and corrupt.

[The Romulan Republic]

In order for the US to qualify as a dictatorship, Trump would have to retain power past the next schedueled election, via means other then winning the election. i.e military force, legal trickery.

At this point, the US is still a democracy, just very disfunctional and corrupt.

Well, anyone who thinks he isn't going to try to a) rig the election and b) scream fraud and refuse to accept the results if he loses hasn't been paying attention.

[Ralin]

In order for the US to qualify as a dictatorship, Trump would have to retain power past the next schedueled election, via means other then winning the election. i.e military force, legal trickery.

At this point, the US is still a democracy, just very disfunctional and corrupt.

Lincoln was probably the closest thing we've had to a straight up dictator (in the classical, non-pejorative sense) and he didn't fuck with the next election as far as I know. That seems like an arbitrary place to draw the line.

[bilateralrope]

I'm hoping the courts are willing to hold anyone who ignores the Supreme Court ruling in contempt until they comply with it. Even if that means imprisoning the people printing up the illegal census.

In order for the US to qualify as a dictatorship, Trump would have to retain power past the next schedueled election, via means other then winning the election. i.e military force, legal trickery.

At this point, the US is still a democracy, just very disfunctional and corrupt.

What about legal trickery like getting people to refuse to fill in the census in Democrat heavy areas, causing those areas to look less populated than they really are when it comes to drawing congressional borders ?

Which has been the Republicans goal with citizenship question the whole time.

[The Romulan Republic]

In order for the US to qualify as a dictatorship, Trump would have to retain power past the next schedueled election, via means other then winning the election. i.e military force, legal trickery.

At this point, the US is still a democracy, just very disfunctional and corrupt.

Lincoln was probably the closest thing we've had to a straight up dictator (in the classical, non-pejorative sense) and he didn't fuck with the next election as far as I know. That seems like an arbitrary place to draw the line.

Its not, the ability to remove a leader by democratic elections is one of the key distinguishing features (arguably the most important one) between a dictatorship and a non-dictatorship. Unfortunately, its one that's already been heavily compromised, and which Trump has made clear he intends to undermine further (because, you know, he'll probably be arrested if he leaves office before the Statute of Limitations on Campaign Finance violations and Obstruction are up).

As to Lincoln, he definitely took actions which under normal circumstances would be inarguably despotic- suspending Habeus Corpus, essentially starting a war without Congressional approval, etc. But he essentially argued, not without reason, that those steps were necessary in order to preserve the nation and constitution, and that it would be ridiculous to allow the entire constitution to be overthrown rather than violate a single portion of it. And it should be noted that the Supreme Court subsequently upheld a lot of his decisions. And, as you noted, there were important lines that he didn't cross.

Lincoln also had, frankly, the strength of character not to flagrantly abuse his powers for personal gain. Such personal integrity being something that Trump utterly lacks.

[The Romulan Republic]

Also of note here is that Dickless and his toady apparently replaced the entire DOJ legal team on this case, possibly because the DOJ lawyers refused to present them with an alternative argument to use to justify the citizenship question to the Supreme Court. If true, this basically means that the entire DOJ legal team saw what utter bullshit they were expected to spew on Trump's behalf and basically said "Screw this, I'm out of here."

Edit: Which would be rather encouraging, really. One of the most frightening things about the last few years to me is that there haven't been more conscientious objectors within the government.

[Broomstick]

I'm hoping the courts are willing to hold anyone who ignores the Supreme Court ruling in contempt until they comply with it.

Based on the example of Andrew Jackson... don't hold your breath. Of course, there's a reason Jackson is held in some esteem by Trump.

[Broomstick]

Edit: Which would be rather encouraging, really. One of the most frightening things about the last few years to me is that there haven't been more conscientious objectors within the government.

That's because the conscientious objectors left, leaving just toadies behind. The list of people who have left the current administration dwarfs any previous total.

[The Romulan Republic]

Edit: Which would be rather encouraging, really. One of the most frightening things about the last few years to me is that there haven't been more conscientious objectors within the government.

That's because the conscientious objectors left, leaving just toadies behind. The list of people who have left the current administration dwarfs any previous total.

Or been fired/purged (see Comey, McCabe, etc.).

[bilateralrope]

Also of note here is that Dickless and his toady apparently replaced the entire DOJ legal team on this case, possibly because the DOJ lawyers refused to present them with an alternative argument to use to justify the citizenship question to the Supreme Court. If true, this basically means that the entire DOJ legal team saw what utter bullshit they were expected to spew on Trump's behalf and basically said "Screw this, I'm out of here."

Edit: Which would be rather encouraging, really. One of the most frightening things about the last few years to me is that there haven't been more conscientious objectors within the government.

Yet the new team haven't come up with a reason either. So I'm not sure if they quit because they objected or got fired when they couldn't do the impossible.

[Lost Soal]

Only two of them have been allowed to leave the rest must stay.
Courthouse News

No Exit for Justice Department Counsel in NY Census Suit
July 9, 2019 ADAM KLASFELD
MANHATTAN (CN) – An attempt by the Department of Justice to withdraw 11 attorneys from the New York phase of the 2020 census litigation is “patently deficient,” a federal judge found in a scathing order Tuesday afternoon, ruling that nine of them will not be able to leave.

The other two attorneys, Brett Shumate and Alice LeCour, have left the Justice Department’s Civil Division and will be allowed to withdraw from the hotly disputed litigation.

“Defendants provide no reasons, let alone ‘satisfactory reasons,’ for the substitution of counsel,” U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman wrote in a 3-page opinion.

Since a narrow Supreme Court majority blocked the government from including a citizenship question from the once-in-a-decade survey, the Justice Department has sent mixed signals about its next steps.

The high court had ruled that the introduction of the question on a false pretext violated the Administrative Procedure Act, but pending litigation in New York and Maryland raised the issue that the government wanted to add it to discriminate against immigrants of color. The discovery of evidence showing the question had been designed to benefit “Republicans and non-Hispanic whites” gave those cases new traction.

Seeking to cut their losses, the Commerce Department announced shortly after the June 27 ruling that the agency had been printing the surveys without the citizenship question, and the government would not seek to reintroduce it.

Last week, Justice Department attorneys promised a federal judge in Maryland that they would drop the matter “once and for all.”

Then, a day later, President Donald Trump contradicted them in a tweet, and the Justice Department quickly backtracked, regrouped, and—in a move widely interpreted as an attempt by career government attorneys to distance themselves from the case—sought to replace their legal team.

Judge Furman reminded the Justice Department that the court has restrictions on what circumstances allow the substitution of counsel.

“An attorney who has appeared as attorney of record for a party may be relieved or displaced only by order of the court and may not withdraw from a case without leave of the court granted by order,” those guidelines read. “Such an order may be granted only upon a showing by affidavit or otherwise of satisfactory reasons for withdrawal or displacement and the posture of the case, including its position, if any, on the calendar, and whether or not the attorney is asserting a retaining or charging lien.”

The judge found that the government failed to meet that bar.

“Measured against those standards, defendants’ motion is patently deficient,” Furman wrote.

Even though multiple federal judges have issued injunctions blocking the government from adding the citizenship question to the 2020 census, President Trump has floated the idea of reintroducing the query via an executive order. Justice Department attorneys could face sanctions for violating an order or misleading a court.

Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti interpreted the ruling as a signal that Furman would hold the Justice Department accountable for its stances in the litigation.

“If they are in the case, and they contradict what they told the judge previously, he could hold them in contempt,” Mariotti tweeted.

The New York Attorney General’s office, which is leading the Manhattan litigation against the government, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Neither did the Justice Department.

[Solauren]

In order for the US to qualify as a dictatorship, Trump would have to retain power past the next schedueled election, via means other then winning the election. i.e military force, legal trickery.

At this point, the US is still a democracy, just very disfunctional and corrupt.

Well, anyone who thinks he isn't going to try to a) rig the election and b) scream fraud and refuse to accept the results if he loses hasn't been paying attention.

But, he hasn't actually done it yet. Just like I could go out, purchase a gun, and talk about blowing someone specific away. Until I actually blow that person away, I'm not a murderer.

That's a very important distinction, especially in this case. Right now, Trump is just a corrupt asshole. However, he has not crossed that line to Dictator. He hasn't dismantled law or institution or anything like that. He's just abusing them.

But, until he becomes a dictator, there is very little, legally, that can be done against him, or that people will be willing to do.

[bilateralrope]

So:
- The Supreme Court says that the citizenship question can't be on the census.
- The contents of the census needed to be finalized by June 30 so that they could start printing on July 1. Which they have, without the citizenship question.
- The commerce department has given up trying to have the citizenship question in this census.

The only ones still fighting for the question* are Barr and Trump. I understand why Trump won't give up: His ego won't let him. But I don't understand why Barr is still publicly fighting for the citizenship question.


*In this census. I expect this fight to be repeated for the next one.

[The Romulan Republic]

In order for the US to qualify as a dictatorship, Trump would have to retain power past the next schedueled election, via means other then winning the election. i.e military force, legal trickery.

At this point, the US is still a democracy, just very disfunctional and corrupt.

Well, anyone who thinks he isn't going to try to a) rig the election and b) scream fraud and refuse to accept the results if he loses hasn't been paying attention.

But, he hasn't actually done it yet. Just like I could go out, purchase a gun, and talk about blowing someone specific away. Until I actually blow that person away, I'm not a murderer.

That's a very important distinction, especially in this case. Right now, Trump is just a corrupt asshole. However, he has not crossed that line to Dictator. He hasn't dismantled law or institution or anything like that. He's just abusing them.

But, until he becomes a dictator, there is very little, legally, that can be done against him, or that people will be willing to do.

Well, there are a few things people can do:

1. Get the facts out there. Read the news, forward it to others, keep up with what's going on.

2. Civil disobedience, particularly for government officials being asked to enact illegal and inhumane decisions. Though this might cross the line into "illegal" on a number of occasions, obviously.

3. Campaign like hell for 2020. Even if Trump rigs the vote, or refuses to leave once its obvious he's lost, this is still important, as the stronger our turnout, the more obvious his fraud and despotism will be, and the fewer people will buy whatever bullshit story he spins. A close race probably means Trump wins, regardless of who the actual victor is. We need any shit he pulls to be obvious enough that officials, and particularly military personnel, will be hesitant to back it up.

[Broomstick]

*In this census. I expect this fight to be repeated for the next one.

The Census only comes every 10 years here - if Trump isn't out of office by then we have bigger problems than the wording on the form.

[SpottedKitty]

MANHATTAN (CN) – An attempt by the Department of Justice to withdraw 11 attorneys from the New York phase of the 2020 census litigation is “patently deficient,” a federal judge found in a scathing order Tuesday afternoon, ruling that nine of them will not be able to leave.

Isn't that the sort of thing a judge says when he gently suggests that the Chewbacca Defence doesn't actually work in real life...?

[The Romulan Republic]

Going back to this:

In order for the US to qualify as a dictatorship, Trump would have to retain power past the next schedueled election, via means other then winning the election. i.e military force, legal trickery.

At this point, the US is still a democracy, just very disfunctional and corrupt.

Well, anyone who thinks he isn't going to try to a) rig the election and b) scream fraud and refuse to accept the results if he loses hasn't been paying attention.

But, he hasn't actually done it yet. Just like I could go out, purchase a gun, and talk about blowing someone specific away. Until I actually blow that person away, I'm not a murderer.

That's an interesting comparison, because, while you could pick up a gun, talk about blowing someone away, and not be a murderer, you could still be arrested and charged for threats/planning an attack.

Apparently we have stronger protections against threats/conspiracy for individuals than for our elections system and rule of law.

Edit: I'll add that in my opinion, just having a vote isn't enough for a country to qualify as "not a dictatorship". Voting rights and access have to be broad, there has to be a reasonably high confidence that the result is fair and not tampered with, and you have to have other freedoms and rights which are required for democracy to function. Like a high level of freedom of belief/expression and freedom of information, because an uninformed electorate cannot make informed choices in an election. And due process, where fundamental rights cannot be taken away or threatened without evidence, without the authorization of an independent judicial system, or without the accused having an opportunity to defend themselves in court.

You could have a rubber-stamp vote every four years and still be unquestionably living in a dictatorship.

[bilateralrope]

*In this census. I expect this fight to be repeated for the next one.

The Census only comes every 10 years here - if Trump isn't out of office by then we have bigger problems than the wording on the form.

Do you really think that this citizenship question was Trump's idea ?

Because everything I've heard makes it look like this question was linked to Republican gerrymandering efforts. Including a major player in the gerrymandering being behind the question:

WASHINGTON — Thomas B. Hofeller achieved near-mythic status in the Republican Party as the Michelangelo of gerrymandering, the architect of partisan political maps that cemented the party’s dominance across the country.

But after he died last summer, his estranged daughter discovered hard drives in her father’s home that revealed something else: Mr. Hofeller had played a crucial role in the Trump administration’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

Republican efforts to rig the vote won't stop just because Trump is gone.

[Tribble]

So:
- The Supreme Court says that the citizenship question can't be on the census.
- The contents of the census needed to be finalized by June 30 so that they could start printing on July 1. Which they have, without the citizenship question.
- The commerce department has given up trying to have the citizenship question in this census.

The only ones still fighting for the question* are Barr and Trump. I understand why Trump won't give up: His ego won't let him. But I don't understand why Barr is still publicly fighting for the citizenship question.


*In this census. I expect this fight to be repeated for the next one.

Edit: This goes far beyond the census question. If Trump is successful in issuing an executive order to ignore a SCOTUS decision, that would be a hell of a precedent. If that's allowed to go through and the US President gets the authority to overturn any SCOTUS decision s/he doesn't like via executive order, then the executive branch is completely above the law. No wonder why they are going for it.

[The Romulan Republic]

If Trump is successful in issuing an executive order to ignore a SCOTUS decision, that would be a hell of a precedent. No wonder why they are trying it.

If he does it, and its carried out, and he is not subsequently removed from office or prosecuted for it, it is the end of the rule of law in America. At that point, the only law will be the edicts of Dictator Trump.

[Tribble]

If Trump is successful in issuing an executive order to ignore a SCOTUS decision, that would be a hell of a precedent. No wonder why they are trying it.

If he does it, and its carried out, and he is not subsequently removed from office or prosecuted for it, it is the end of the rule of law in America. At that point, the only law will be the edicts of Dictator Trump.

I'm 100% in agreement with you. Hell, if Trump and Barr are successful here that would make our own Notwithstanding Clause look pretty tame in comparison (since that at least has a formal process to limit abuse).

[Eternal_Freedom]

MANHATTAN (CN) – An attempt by the Department of Justice to withdraw 11 attorneys from the New York phase of the 2020 census litigation is “patently deficient,” a federal judge found in a scathing order Tuesday afternoon, ruling that nine of them will not be able to leave.

Isn't that the sort of thing a judge says when he gently suggests that the Chewbacca Defence doesn't actually work in real life...?

Yeah, as someone who works with Judges (in the UK admittedly not the US) "Patently deficient" is very strong language. Not quite as bad as describing a litigant as "frivolous and vexatious" but it's up there.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, the House will vote on whether to hold Barr and Commerce Secretary Ross in criminal contempt for withholding information from Congress about the census:

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4526 ... l-contempt

Its a pretty weak response, honestly- the blatant disregard for the Constitution, rule of law, and Judiciary here is more than enough to warrant impeachment of Barr, Ross, and Trump himself, in my opinion. But at least its something. Hopefully Pelosi recognizes that this is just as much of a do-or-die issue as the government shutdown, and doesn't fold. The stakes here are essentially the same: the constitutional authority of an entire branch of government.

[The Romulan Republic]

Well, it looks like Dickless has backed down, at least for now, though if past experience is any guide, its only while he tries to figure out another way to do an end-run around the law:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/u ... ion-to-us/

U.S. President Donald Trump was expected to back down on Thursday on plans to add a contentious citizenship question to the 2020 census, but order the government do the survey by other means, a government official told Reuters.

The official confirmed that Trump is expected to announce he will drop the legal battle to include the question on the national survey and instead direct the Commerce Department to obtain answers on citizenship through other means, but it was not clear how that would occur or how it would be funded.

The U.S. Census Bureau is part of the Commerce Department. The U.S. Constitution specifically assigns the job of overseeing the census to Congress, which complicated adding the question to the decennial survey via a presidential order.

Critics of the Trump administration’s effort say that asking about citizenship in the census discriminates against racial minorities and is aimed at giving Republicans an unfair advantage in elections. Trump and his supporters say it makes sense to know how many non-citizens are living in the country.

Republican Trump has made hard-line policies on immigration a feature of his presidency and his campaign for re-election in 2020. The more than 20 Democrats vying for their party’s nomination to run against Trump question his immigration policies.

White House spokesman Hogan Gidley said Trump would do everything within his legal authority to determine and make public who is in the United States legally and who is not.

“It should come as no surprise … that the president wants to know who’s in this country legally and lawfully and who isn’t. And he’s going to do everything within his legal authority to make sure that that information is known, because the American people have a right to know,” he told reporters.

Courts had halted Trump’s attempts to add the question because of challenges from some U.S. states and civil rights groups. The U.S. Supreme Court blocked Trump’s citizenship question on June 27, faulting the administration’s rationale as “contrived.”

Trump’s decision to drop plans for an executive order was first reported by ABC News.

Opponents of the proposed census citizenship question had vowed to challenge Trump’s new action in court.

“The Supreme Court has spoken. The Trump administration’s effort to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census is unlawful. If President Trump takes executive action, we will take legal action,” the American Civil Liberties Union said in a statement.

The census is used to determine how many seats each state gets in the House of Representatives and also affects how billions of dollars in federal funds are doled out.

The legal battle has also extended to how the Department of Justice has handled the case. The department, led by U.S. Attorney General William Barr, a Trump appointee, sought to shake up its legal team by replacing the lawyers involved with handling litigation on the census.

On Wednesday, a second federal judge rejected the department’s efforts, saying it had to offer detailed reasoning for the change.

Democratic Representative Elijah Cummings, chairman of the House of Representatives’ Committee on Oversight and Reform, said the House would vote on July 16 to hold Barr and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in criminal contempt of Congress for failing to comply with subpoenas seeking information about the administration’s attempts to add the census question.

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.