June 29, 2019
Do we live in a country or in a traveling circus?
Not being allowed to ask who is a citizen and who is not seems like a very, very basic requirement for having a functioning nation-state.
This is not serious. This is simply absurd. And we have a “conservative” judge to thank for it.
The Supreme Court found Thursday that the Trump administration did not give an adequate reason for adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, blocking the question for at least the time being.
The move is a surprise win for advocates who opposed the question’s addition, arguing it will lead to an inaccurate population count. The administration had argued the question was needed to enforce the Voting Rights Act (VRA).
Those challenging the question said that asking about citizenship would cause non-citizens or immigrants to skip the question. The Trump administration has maintained in court filings that the data would not be accessible to other parts of the federal government, like immigration officials, but opponents argued that the implied perception surrounding asking about citizenship is enough to cause minority groups to not answer the question, or skip out on the census altogether.
The justices sent the issue back to the Commerce Department to provide another explanation.
Chief Justice John Roberts joined with the court’s liberal wing in delivering the court’s opinion.
Roberts wrote that “the decision to reinstate a citizenship question cannot be adequately explained in terms of DOJ’s [the Department of Justice’s] request for improved citizenship data to better enforce the VRA.”
The important takeaway here is that we need to take a good hard look at who exactly Chief Roberts is and why he’s being such a stick in the mud.
Is he a homosexual?
Why does he have no biological children?
Is he, in fact, a living sponge who can only reproduce asexually?
Is he, perhaps, a lesbian?
What’s he hiding behind that tight-lipped smile and those scared little bloodshot eyes?
For someone so smart, he sure seems like a doofus unable to see the forest for the trees with this pedantic ruling.
I simply don’t know what to make of this man.
But I do know that America needs to have an open and honest discussion on whether he sucks dick on the side or not because literally everyone is thinking it at this point. No sane conservative would have voted with the liberals unless they had some kompromat on them, or were sexual deviants who simply act out erratically from time to time as they are wont to do.
Am I on the right track here?
Am I over-analyzing this?
Am I seeing things that aren’t there?
What is going on with this turbulent judge?