That is, the Trump Administration has reversed its reversal: it will try to add a citizenship question in a way "consistent with the Supreme Court's decision" (to quote Jody Hunt, assistant...
That is, the Trump Administration has reversed its reversal: it will try to add a citizenship question in a way "consistent with the Supreme Court's decision" (to quote Jody Hunt, assistant attorney general for the Civil Division of the DOJ).
The move is rather ridiculous. The Trump Administration argued that the question was needed to protect the voting rights of minority groups; however, Thomas Hofeller, a redistricting expert who worked for the GOP (and who is personally responsible for many states's gerrymandered maps), conducted a study concluding that such a question would actually suppress minority response rates. Moreover, he shared these results with Census Bureau employees, making his study the likely catalyst for including a citizenship question.
The Administration's justification for adding the census question was clearly pretextual (which is the reason the attempt to add the question failed). Whatever arguments the Administration cooks up next won't suddenly become non-pretextual just because the DOJ invents a new justification.
It is not exactly clear, to be honest. The most likely explanation is that this decision was not communicated to Census officials until Trump’s tweet, and now they are scrambling to satisfy his...
It is not exactly clear, to be honest. The most likely explanation is that this decision was not communicated to Census officials until Trump’s tweet, and now they are scrambling to satisfy his demands. It isn’t clear how they could ask the question while still being consistent with the ruling. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see yet another reversal in the coming days as it becomes clear it won’t be possible. The only other option is outright ignoring the SC ruling, which in the long history of rulings would not be unprecedented but certainly would be in the modern era. But we will have to wait and see.
There was a conference call between a judge and DOJ's lawyers this afternoon, and they straight up said this. Nobody got a heads up before that tweet and now everyone is stuck trying to defend it...
The most likely explanation is that this decision was not communicated to Census officials until Trump’s tweet
The tweet this morning was the first I had heard of the President's position on this issue... But, obviously, as you can imagine, I am doing my absolute best to figure out what's going on.
Nobody got a heads up before that tweet and now everyone is stuck trying to defend it on the fly.
That whole transcript is sheer madness and worth a read. The judge is really pissed off being pulled back and forth, and the lawyers have absolutely no argument as to why they are doing that.
That is, the Trump Administration has reversed its reversal: it will try to add a citizenship question in a way "consistent with the Supreme Court's decision" (to quote Jody Hunt, assistant attorney general for the Civil Division of the DOJ).
The move is rather ridiculous. The Trump Administration argued that the question was needed to protect the voting rights of minority groups; however, Thomas Hofeller, a redistricting expert who worked for the GOP (and who is personally responsible for many states's gerrymandered maps), conducted a study concluding that such a question would actually suppress minority response rates. Moreover, he shared these results with Census Bureau employees, making his study the likely catalyst for including a citizenship question.
The Administration's justification for adding the census question was clearly pretextual (which is the reason the attempt to add the question failed). Whatever arguments the Administration cooks up next won't suddenly become non-pretextual just because the DOJ invents a new justification.
It is not exactly clear, to be honest. The most likely explanation is that this decision was not communicated to Census officials until Trump’s tweet, and now they are scrambling to satisfy his demands. It isn’t clear how they could ask the question while still being consistent with the ruling. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see yet another reversal in the coming days as it becomes clear it won’t be possible. The only other option is outright ignoring the SC ruling, which in the long history of rulings would not be unprecedented but certainly would be in the modern era. But we will have to wait and see.
There was a conference call between a judge and DOJ's lawyers this afternoon, and they straight up said this.
Nobody got a heads up before that tweet and now everyone is stuck trying to defend it on the fly.
That whole transcript is sheer madness and worth a read. The judge is really pissed off being pulled back and forth, and the lawyers have absolutely no argument as to why they are doing that.