Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   Supreme Court to hear arguments on whether non-citizens count as people. This is basically a repeat from 1789   (twitter.com) divider line
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

3319 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 16 Oct 2020 at 9:07 PM (8 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



188 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-10-16 7:14:53 PM  
Original Tweet:

 
2020-10-16 7:15:51 PM  
Dred Scott 2.0
 
2020-10-16 7:23:34 PM  
Couldn't there be some kind of compromise involving fractions?
 
2020-10-16 7:28:41 PM  
'Murica.
 
2020-10-16 7:30:28 PM  
Wow, when they call themselves old school they mean it.
 
2020-10-16 7:47:08 PM  
I guess we'll soon see how much of a "originalist" Barrett and Thomas actually are.
 
2020-10-16 7:48:51 PM  
According to this article, California, Texas, and Florida would each lose one and Minnesota, Alabama, and Ohio would each gain one. Sounds like a wash.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank​/​2020/07/24/how-removing-unauthorized-i​mmigrants-from-census-statistics-could​-affect-house-reapportionment/
 
2020-10-16 8:16:12 PM  
Most of the undocumented people in the US are more American than the Russian-loving Trumpers.
 
2020-10-16 8:18:13 PM  

Jack Sabbath: Couldn't there be some kind of compromise involving fractions?


See, this is the best argument on why the Trump administration is full of shiat.  For the first seventy years, the census counted farm machinery, which weren't even considered humans.  While I'm sure the Republicans think of brown people as unthings, they don't actually call them that, so they can hardly argue that a system set up to prorate John Deere tractors on the count should exclude those no one openly disputes are human beings.
 
2020-10-16 8:49:57 PM  
I'd imagine there were a lot of non-citizens too afraid to be counted this time around, being intimidated by Trump et al.
That's messed up, to say the least.
 
2020-10-16 9:10:35 PM  
Inaccurate headlines everywhere
 
2020-10-16 9:11:32 PM  
This doesn't really help Republicans a whole lot:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-10-16 9:12:07 PM  
This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?
 
2020-10-16 9:14:08 PM  

hugram: Most of the undocumented people in the US are more American than the Russian-loving Trumpers.


This is amusing to me because my brother (degree in Russian, wife is Russian) was saying that census shouldn't count undocumented since non-citizens don't matter.

/why yes, he is a trumphumper
/my phone now recognizes and auto-suggests trumphumper 😂😂
 
2020-10-16 9:15:07 PM  

Alwysadydrmr: hugram: Most of the undocumented people in the US are more American than the Russian-loving Trumpers.

This is amusing to me because my brother (degree in Russian, wife is Russian) was saying that census shouldn't count undocumented since non-citizens don't matter.

/why yes, he is a trumphumper
/my phone now recognizes and auto-suggests trumphumper 😂😂


Note: amusing because it's true
 
2020-10-16 9:15:29 PM  
The Tweet is short on details, though it refers to a "question of jurisdiction" being postponed to a hearing on the merits.  If this is a Federal Court then doesn't it have to resolve any issues of jurisdiction first?  If the court lacks jurisdiction, then it must dismiss the case without a decision on the merits.
 
2020-10-16 9:15:47 PM  

hugram: Most of the undocumented people in the US are more American than the Russian-loving Trumpers.


Reposting due to extreme agreement
 
2020-10-16 9:17:09 PM  

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?


Because they're people. That's what the census counts, people living in the country.
 
2020-10-16 9:18:57 PM  

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?


Undocumented individuals often use local and state services, so helps towards the allocation of resources I believe.
 
2020-10-16 9:19:01 PM  
"Someone who would go across a desert that can kill you... you want to be an American that bad? I'm honored to share a country with you" -Henry Rollins
 
2020-10-16 9:20:30 PM  

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?


The biggest thing would probably be allocation of resources, Just because a person isn't here legally doesn't Face still used resources based on the allocation of tax dollars.  If you wanna argument that maybe it shouldn't count towards having a representative maybe there is the compromise, But underfunding Tax subsidised programs hurts everybody
 
2020-10-16 9:21:26 PM  

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?


Setting aside the question of whether or not people should actually count as people, having an understanding of your population, how big it is, where those people are, and what resources they may need/will use is pretty important for keeping things functioning. The census isn't just used for figuring out house reps; social services, education, and infrastructure programs all depend oh the census and federal grants that are determined by the data. If you only count half the people, and only budget and plan for half of the people, you're going to have a very bad time.
 
2020-10-16 9:21:36 PM  

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?


The legal answer is because the US Constitution explicitly requires it.  From a practical perspective states desire representation proportional to all of their residents, not just all of their voters.  This includes non-citizens who could become citizens someday, but are already working, paying taxes, and receiving services.  This also include those under 18 who cannot yet vote, but, again, still both contribute to and receive benefits from the state.
 
2020-10-16 9:23:31 PM  
Just another ruling to serve as an example of why changes need to be made to the court to fix republican court packing.
 
2020-10-16 9:24:15 PM  
Cool cool. Ok.  Next administration can say republicans aren't people.
 
2020-10-16 9:24:50 PM  

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?


There is no reason for a non-citizen to be counted for benefits. Benefits go to citizens of the nation and those who enter in accordance with proper procedure. That's how it works everywhere. Anything that opposes this idea is immoral and hurts immigrants who properly come to this country, like my family.
 
2020-10-16 9:24:58 PM  

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?


How about because they pay f*cking taxes, huh?
 
2020-10-16 9:25:16 PM  

NotoriousFire: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?

Undocumented individuals often use local and state services, so helps towards the allocation of resources I believe.


It also counts towards representation in Congress, which only makes sense.
A state should be able to use millions of illegal wage-slaves to give itself more political power.
 
2020-10-16 9:25:59 PM  
Didn't they just have this case like 2-3 years ago?
 
2020-10-16 9:26:15 PM  

OrangeSnapper: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?

The legal answer is because the US Constitution explicitly requires it.  From a practical perspective states desire representation proportional to all of their residents, not just all of their voters.  This includes non-citizens who could become citizens someday, but are already working, paying taxes, and receiving services.  This also include those under 18 who cannot yet vote, but, again, still both contribute to and receive benefits from the state.


You take the constitution literally on just this one point but trash anyone who takes the first and second amendments literally. There's a cherry tree in your backyard, go pick it instead.
 
2020-10-16 9:26:39 PM  

Truck Fump: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?

How about because they pay f*cking taxes, huh?


No no they can magically dodge all those, even sales tax!   They have spooky immigrant powers that let them sponge off of everything lazily whilst simultaneously taking our jerbs!
 
2020-10-16 9:27:29 PM  
BROKEN: Supreme Court
 
2020-10-16 9:28:16 PM  

Some Junkie Cosmonaut: Truck Fump: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?

How about because they pay f*cking taxes, huh?

No no they can magically dodge all those, even sales tax!   They have spooky immigrant powers that let them sponge off of everything lazily whilst simultaneously taking our jerbs!


It's funny because it's true!
 
2020-10-16 9:28:56 PM  
The Supreme Court was turned into a partisan republican shiatshow by Mitch farking McConnell.  Does anyone still think it has any legitimacy at all?
 
2020-10-16 9:29:33 PM  
We should just census the entire world and let everyone, citizen or not, be represented in US government.
 
2020-10-16 9:29:35 PM  

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?


Because the section of the consitution that calls for a census refers to "persons" and "inhabitants".

The only time the word "citizen" is mentioned (once) is eligibility to serve in Congress.

There was a clear, unambiguous distinction there - the census is supposed to count people and inhabitants, not citizens.
 
2020-10-16 9:32:51 PM  
Sorry, this really frosts me. The undocumented folks are here, basically, because they want a better life, and they are willing to work their asses off to get it, risking being sent back with nothing. Yeah, perhaps they didn't obey the rules, but maybe they looked at the chance and figured, what the heck, give it a try.

They deserve to be counted and treated like human beings, because they are. There, but for the grace of God, go I, and all that. Civilised countries treat everyone with respect.

We have it a lot better than other places. Yes, even with the orange baboon. Who wouldn't know how to obey a law if it came up and bit him in his fat, hairy ass. Which, God willing, might happen within the next few months, if we are all good little girls and boys and go out and vote.

Carry on.
 
2020-10-16 9:35:33 PM  

phalamir: Jack Sabbath: Couldn't there be some kind of compromise involving fractions?

See, this is the best argument on why the Trump administration is full of shiat.  For the first seventy years, the census counted farm machinery, which weren't even considered humans.  While I'm sure the Republicans think of brown people as unthings, they don't actually call them that, so they can hardly argue that a system set up to prorate John Deere tractors on the count should exclude those no one openly disputes are human beings.


"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."

They did count the farm machinery, just at 60% of their humanity.

Also, notice they say "free persons" and not "citizen", which is used as a qualifier in multiple other paragraphs to determine eligibility for Congressional office.
 
2020-10-16 9:36:59 PM  
 
2020-10-16 9:38:16 PM  

Mad_Radhu: This doesn't really help Republicans a whole lot:

[Fark user image 425x425]


They're going to use the miscount to redistrict within the states.  They'll take votes away from cities and give them to rural areas.
 
2020-10-16 9:38:43 PM  

ThieveryCorp: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?

There is no reason for a non-citizen to be counted for benefits. Benefits go to citizens of the nation and those who enter in accordance with proper procedure. That's how it works everywhere. Anything that opposes this idea is immoral and hurts immigrants who properly come to this country, like my family.


Translation : I got mine.
 
2020-10-16 9:38:48 PM  

Truck Fump: Yeah, perhaps they didn't obey the rules,


Right, but it's worth pointing out they committed a civil infraction.  They are "illegal immigrants" the same way we're all "illegal drivers" when we go four over the speed limit on the highway.
 
2020-10-16 9:39:05 PM  
Status wasnt a question on the census because of an earlier court ruling before the whole thing began.  How would anyone know said status? Why cant we get an actual article on the details rather than a bleeping tweet?
 
2020-10-16 9:40:36 PM  

Ouze: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?

Because the section of the consitution that calls for a census refers to "persons" and "inhabitants".

The only time the word "citizen" is mentioned (once) is eligibility to serve in Congress.

There was a clear, unambiguous distinction there - the census is supposed to count people and inhabitants, not citizens.


They counted people and explicitly said persons in the constitution because they counted slaves (fractionally), and they counted non-residents that consume resources.  They counted Indians, who were persons but technically not citizens.

So, there's the requirement to count persons there.  I think what the Trump* team are saying now is that they want to infer the illegals and foreign residents numbers and then apportion based on that number that number subtracted from the person count. Not the number of persons, but number of citizens for representation apportionment.

The bottom line I think is this: Is a "population" used for apportionment the citizen population or the population of residents in each state?
 
2020-10-16 9:41:03 PM  

ThieveryCorp: SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?

There is no reason for a non-citizen to be counted for benefits. Benefits go to citizens of the nation and those who enter in accordance with proper procedure. That's how it works everywhere. Anything that opposes this idea is immoral and hurts immigrants who properly come to this country, like my family.


Haha no.

If you really think that way, you go and pitch out all of the food in your house. Go on. Otherwise, you're just supporting and benefiting from what you call immoral. Our entire agricultural industry is propped up by migrant workers. They come here to work. They come here for a better life. And they work hard. So damn hard. They get paid shiat. They even pay taxes. They contribute to the communities they're in. And they make your life a hell of a lot easier and more comfortable than it would be otherwise. So get off your damn high horse. We're talking about human beings being treated as actual human beings. You are not more deserving of benefits just because your family actually had the means to jump through the hoops. You get to vote. They don't. You get way more control. That should be enough for you.
 
2020-10-16 9:42:02 PM  
The constitution requires a count of population, not citizens.  Based on the original language.  They did not use the word citizen for the census, but did for congress.  Also slaves, who definitely were not citizens, were counted at 3/5.  This further makes clear it's total population.

This case should make the original list in the court very happy as it's very explicit.
 
2020-10-16 9:43:06 PM  

Krieghund: Mad_Radhu: This doesn't really help Republicans a whole lot:

[Fark user image 425x425]

They're going to use the miscount to redistrict within the states.  They'll take votes away from cities and give them to rural areas.


That still doesn't help much, what w/ the farm workers.
 
2020-10-16 9:45:22 PM  

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: This being Fark go ahead and call me a racist for asking the question but why should they be counted?


Because the constitution says "persons', not citizens.
 
2020-10-16 9:45:56 PM  
Well, if the Supreme Court attempts Congress-packing, that'll give a big boost to the legitimacy of the idea of a bigger, more inclusive Supreme Court won't it?
 
2020-10-16 9:47:49 PM  
Nothing more official than a SCOTUS precedent, right?
 
Displayed 50 of 188 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



X
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.