Judge Rules States Have Standing to Challenge Inclusion of Illegal Aliens for Reapportionment

[aGameOfThrones]

Judge R. David Proctor looked at the controversy and for the first time had the courage to consider the fact that small states like Alabama are seriously injured by allowing certain large states to attract illegal residents and then pack them in to try to increase political power. California has been doing this for decades.

At first blush this seems a no brainer. Although the Constitution mandates that the Census count the number of “whole persons,” that term has always had a flexible interpretation. “Persons” are, in some contexts, considered corporations, but the Census Bureau has never counted corporations. Similarly, the Census Bureau has excluded persons that are domiciled in foreign countries – that is people who just happen to be here on Census Day but don’t actually live in the U.S. permanently.

The framers never considered the possibility that persons with no right to be in the U.S. would demand the level of political representation that would actually shift the balance of power in the House of Representatives. And yet it has been going on – and getting worse – decade after decade. The Census Bureau refuses to change the practice on its own.

Nearly 20 years have passed before another attempt was made: but credit the State of Alabama and the intrepid Representative Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) with the effort – along with the Immigration Reform Law Institute as a supporting player. In the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Judge Proctor considered the government’s inevitable Motion to Dismiss for lack of standing and – for once – recognized that the injury complained of is serious, corrosive of our democracy, and fundamentally unfair. His decision was issued on June 5.

If the Census Bureau wants to count illegal aliens for other purposes, say for the purposes of data collection and allocation of federal funds, that is perfectly fine. But not to allocate the federal districts in Congress.

The case is State of Alabama v. Dept. of Commerce, No. 2:18-cv-00772 (N.D. Ala.), and while it is a long way from achieving a final decision on the merits, it is a positive first step in very long path to success. When it comes to immigration policy, persistence is always a winner.

https://www.immigrationreform.com/2019/06/06/judge-rules-states-have-standing-immigrationreform-com/

[Swordsmyth]

:up:

[oyarde]

Easy ruling . Of course , anywhere only citizens count .

[Zippyjuan]

If the Census Bureau wants to count illegal aliens for other purposes, say for the purposes of data collection and allocation of federal funds, that is perfectly fine. But not to allocate the federal districts in Congress.

The Constitution specifies that it DOES count towards the allocation of seats in Congress.

https://constitutionallawreporter.com/article-01-section-02/


Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers,

[Swordsmyth]

The Constitution specifies that it DOES count towards the allocation of seats in Congress.

https://constitutionallawreporter.com/article-01-section-02/

It doesn't say that "their respective numbers" includes foreigners, foreigners don't belong to the state so they can't be "theirs".

[Zippyjuan]

It doesn't say that "their respective numbers" includes foreigners, foreigners don't belong to the state so they can't be "theirs".

It calls for a counting of all the people living in each state and using that number to determine the number of representatives. It does not say "citizens" but "residents".


Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.


Slaves were the "all other persons" (non- slaves being free) and at the time counted as three fifths of a free person. The law was later changed to count them as full people. Indians were to be counted too.

[Swordsmyth]

It calls for a counting of all the people living in each state and using that number to determine the number of representatives. It does not say "citizens" but "residents".




Slaves were the "all other persons" (non- slaves being free) and at the time counted as three fifths of a free person. The law was later changed to count them as full people. Indians were to be counted too.
It doesn't say "residents", it says "their numbers", foreigners are not "theirs".

[Zippyjuan]

It doesn't say "residents", it says "their numbers", foreigners are not "theirs".

Are they slaves ("all other persons")? Or are they Free Persons (not slaves)? They are one or the other and all are to be counted. The only group it says not to count is Native Americans (and law was changed on them).

[Swordsmyth]

Are they slaves ("all other persons")? Or are the Free Persons (not slaves)? They are one or the other and all are to be counted.
Those are subsets of "their numbers", foreigners aren't even part of "their numbers".

[Zippyjuan]

Those are subsets of "their numbers", foreigners aren't even part of "their numbers".

Where does it say that foreigners are excluded? It only specifically excludes Native Americans. Otherwise, all free and non- free people ("all other persons") are to be counted. If they are not "free persons" they are definitely "all other persons". Unless they are Native Americans.

[Swordsmyth]

Where does it say that foreigners are excluded? It only specifically excludes Native Americans. Otherwise, all free and non- free people ("all other persons") are to be counted. If they are not "free persons" they are definitely "all other persons". Unless they are Native Americans.
It says "THEIR numbers", foreigners are not "THEIRS".

How many times do I have to repeat that?

[Zippyjuan]

It says "THEIR numbers", foreigners are not "THEIRS".

How many times do I have to repeat that?

Repeating it does not make it true. I see you were not able to show where it says that.

[Swordsmyth]

Repeating it does not make it true. I see you were not able to show where it says that.
What part of the word "their" don't you understand?

You posted the part of the Constitution that says it:

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers,



You also tried to claim it said "residents", that word is not found anywhere in the constitution.

[Dr.3D]

Repeating it does not make it true.
I wish somebody would tell that to those people who keep saying, "Our democracy."

[timosman]

Zippy turned out to be quite a constitutional scholar. :tears:

[RonZeplin]

The illegal alien invaders are migrants awaiting a president who will obey their oath of office, and put them on the deportation boat.

https://i0.wp.com/libertyhangout.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/peterseninvictus.jpg?resize=752%2C440


Austin Petersen & Augustus Invictus 2020 :100:

Rule of Law, and a boot in the ass for illegal aliens.

[RestorationOfLiberty]

https://www.immigrationreform.com/2019/06/06/judge-rules-states-have-standing-immigrationreform-com/

Good, stop rewarding invaders and traitors.

[RestorationOfLiberty]

The illegal alien invaders are migrants awaiting a president who will obey their oath of office, and put them on the deportation boat.

https://i0.wp.com/libertyhangout.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/peterseninvictus.jpg?resize=752%2C440


Austin Petersen & Augustus Invictus 2020 :100:

Rule of Law, and a boot in the ass for illegal aliens.



Every foot of wall, and a boot up every invader`s ass.

[RestorationOfLiberty]

Repeating it does not make it true. I see you were not able to show where it says that.

Juan, after we win, we will deport people like you.

[RestorationOfLiberty]

Where does it say that foreigners are excluded? It only specifically excludes Native Americans. Otherwise, all free and non- free people ("all other persons") are to be counted. If they are not "free persons" they are definitely "all other persons". Unless they are Native Americans.

Where Natives citizens? No, therefore it excludes foreigner.

[timosman]

Juan, after we win, we will deport people like you.

I would rather give Zippy a TV show. Ratings bonanza. :tears:

[RestorationOfLiberty]

I would rather give Zippy a TV show. Ratings bonanza. :tears:

Sure, lets call it "I am being deported"...