Article link
The battle between liberal states and the Trump administration's conservative enforcement of immigration policy is continuing in Federal Court. One main question considers whether state and local authorities should be involved with federal immigration efforts and if so, how? Another issue is whether a citizenship question should be added to the 2020 census, which California's attorney general objects to vehemently as it would only serve to distort the census and potentially divert political influence and resources from the state. Although executive powers have grown in recent decades, federal judges are exploring the question of whether executive overreach threatens constitutional principles such as separation of powers and checks against tyranny.
1. In 2019, how might the newly elected governor of California approach the antagonistic relationship that exists with the Federal Government at the moment?
2. Is it reasonable for the government to ask about citizenship on the 2020 census? Why or why not?
3. How should the Federal Court system be involved in this conflict?
Source: The New York Times
2 comments:
I find it amusing that Republicans are super strong state's rights advocates until that starts to mean that liberal states have the right to make liberal policy. The irony is very sweet.
I guess I accidentally repeated one of the points brought up by this post that I did not read before prior to publishing my post on the census. Sorry! But, as I articulated on my take on the census, I do not think that the question of citizenship ought to be included on the census. It just does not make logical sense to me... the census is supposed to gauge the concentration of people in certain areas in order to redistrict accordingly, and that's all. Citizenship doesn't really matter and will possibly skew the census results.
Post a Comment