NEW YORK (AP) — The Justice Department began its appeal Thursday of a New York judge’s ruling stopping the Trump administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census for the first time since 1950.
Garrett Coyle, a Justice Department attorney based in Washington, filed the one-page notice of appeal in Manhattan federal court on behalf of the U.S. Bureau of the Census, the U.S. Department of Commerce and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross.
The notice was forwarded to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which also sits in Manhattan.
U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman said in a lengthy written opinion Tuesday that Ross violated laws by acting in an “arbitrary and capricious” manner before announcing in March that he would add the question.
Furman concluded that lawsuits were accurate when they claimed the question would lead to an undercount of non-citizens, costing some states congressional representation and federal funding.
Furman also rejected Ross’ claim that the question was necessary to help the government enforce the Voting Rights Act. He said Ross acted irrationally as he badly misconstrued evidence and failed to justify major departures from past policies and practices.
A trial on a separate lawsuit on the same issue, filed by the state of California, is underway in San Francisco.
So much for the government shutdown hampering DOJ so much that Barr couldn’t meet with Dems… Appealing rulings apparently is essential work…
The Republican hegemony never sleeps in their quest for century long control and dominance over American politics. This census rigging is a pretty big part of the plan.
WE are so fortunate that we were able to blow a hole in their control via the House of Representatives - hopefully that and the decent people still left in the federal judiciary will be the branch that saves us from going completely over the cliff.
Oh and DOJ needs an extension and a pause during shutdown of all cases we don’t like and we’ll go ahead and work on appeals for cases we do want to be heard.
“Furman also rejected Ross’ claim that the question was necessary to help the government enforce the Voting Rights Act.”
Good looking Wilbur,oh wait a minute:
"In a 5-4 decision, the court decided that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional. Section 4 dictates which parts of the country must receive pre-clearance before election laws can be changed there (more on that below).
“Section 4’s formula is unconstitutional in light of current conditions,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. “Coverage today is based on decades-old data and eradicated practices.”
So in a nutshell, it will fall to Congress to come up with a new formula based on current conditions for figuring out which jurisdictions should be subject to pre-clearance."
OOPPPSSS !