Adam LiptakKonto zweryfikowane

How long will that last--one case?

This illustrates that all the Justices “liberal” and “conservative” are willing to cite any law which bolsters their respective positions. Problem is the conservatives tend to be very critical whenever the liberals do this. So no surprise when people call out their hypocrisy.

Citing Canada: pretty sure that the citizenship question is only in the long-form census, which 1 in 4 households receive. It’s not on every form.

FYI: International and foreign law would never be binding precedent, although it could be used as "persuasive authority." A state supreme court in one jurisdiction, for example, is not even binding precedent in another jurisdiction.

It didn't occur to these justices that other countries don't have an explicit constitutional requirement that a census provide an "actual enumeration," that THEIR non-citizens may have no reason to fear answering, & that since both are so HERE, it may violate OUR Constitution?...

... Hopefully there already are plans to file a lawsuit arguing exactly that, should the Court allow the question--for any reason.

Interesting given all the years they have ignored it in cases involving human rights