AG Barr sees path to legally add citizenship question to census


THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES ARE LIKELY IN FOR A CASE OF OBAMACARE DEJA VU. TODAY A THREE-JUDGE PANEL HEARD ARGUMENTS IN NEW ORLEANS OF THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT AFTER A TEXAS JUDGE RULED TO STRIKE DOWN THE LAW. IT COULD TAKE MONTHS TO GET A RULING FROM THE PANEL, AND NO MATTER WHO WINS OR LOSES, THIS CASE IS LIKELY GOING RIGHT BACK TO THE NATION’S HIGHEST COURT, POSSIBLY IN THE MIDDLE. BOTH SIDES OF THE IL ARE GEARING UP FOR THAT.>>DON’T LET PRESIDENT TRUMP FOOL YOU, DONALD TRUMP AND REPUBLICANS WANT TO TAKE AWAY YOUR HEALTH CARE.>>THERE’S NOBODY IN THE SENATE NOT IN FAVOR OF COVERING PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS, NOBODY. IF IT WERE UNDER ANY OF THESE SCENARIOS TO GO AWAY WE WOULD ACT QUICKLY TO RESTORE IT.>>Shannon: ALL KINDS OF LEGAL ISSUES BREAKING FROM OBAMACARE TO THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WOULD LIKE TO GET BACK. TONIGHT’S LEGAL EAGLES, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL JOHN U. THE SUPREME COURT DIDN’T TELL THE ADMINISTRATION THEY CAN’T HAVE THE QUESTION ON THE CENSUS, THEY SAID THEY DIDN’T AGREE WITH THE REASONING BEHIND IT BUT THEY DIDN’T SAY THERE IS NO WAY THIS KIND OF QUESTION CAN END UP ON THE CENSUS, NOW WANT TO? WE HEAR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAYING WE ARE GOING TO TAKE ACTION, WHAT DO YOU PREDICT?>>YOU ARE RIGHT ABOUT THE COURT, I WOULD SAY IT MORE STRONGLY THAN THAT. THE COURT SAID IT WOULD BE LEGITIMATE SO LONG AS THE ADMINISTRATION HAD A VALID REASON. THE COURT INVITED TRUMP TO TAKE IT AT ITS WORD AND TRY TO PUT THE QUESTION BACK ON AGAIN. WHAT MATTERS IS HOW YOU DO IT, THE PROCESS. THE COURT FELT SECRETARY ROSS CAME UP WITH A CONTRIVED REASON. SUPPOSE THE PRESIDENT SAYS WE NEED TO KNOW HOW MANY CITIZENS VERSUS ALIENS THERE ARE IN THE COUNTRY AND GEOGRAPHY FOR PURPOSES OF IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT AND PUBLIC SERVICES, THAT SEEMS TO BE A LEGITIMATE REASON. THE QUESTION ISN’T WHETHER IT’S LEGAL, IT’S WHETHER THERE’S ENOUGH TIME TO GET THIS DONE BEFORE THE CENSUS HAS TO BE PRINTED.>>Shannon: AND THERE WAS A LOT OF EVIDENCE OF OTHER COUNTRIES AND OTHER PLACES WITH THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTIONS HAS BEEN USED AND FOR DECADES IT WAS USED IN THE UNITED STATES. JUSTICE KAVANAUGH SAID THE UNITED NATIONS RECOMMENDS ASKING THE CITIZEN QUESTIONS ON THE CENSUS IN A NUMBER OF OTHER COUNTRIES DO IT. DO YOU ARGUE THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE INCLUDED?>>THIS IS GOVERNANCE BY CHAOS. THE ADMINISTRATION CAN’T DO THE SIMPLE THINGS, JOHN IS PROBABLY RIGHT, THE SUPREME COURT DID LAY IT OUT IN THEIR RULING. IF THIS HAS BEEN HANDLED PROPERLY, IF THE COMMERCE DEPARTMENT AND THE SECRETARY HAD DONE THIS RIGHT AND THEY COORDINATED PROPERLY, THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN FINE. THEY WOULD’VE GOTTEN IT ON THE CENSUS AND THE COURT WOULD HAVE ALLOWED IT. THEY MESSED UP THE DETAILS AND BECAUSE OF THAT, BECAUSE THEY MADE IT VERY CLEAR THERE WAS A JUNE 30TH DATE THEY HAD TO GET THESE FORMS PRINTED, THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO SAY WE ARE STILL GOING TO GET THIS THING DONE. THAT’S WHY THEY’RE TRYING TO GET NEW LAWYERS AND NEW EXPLANATIONS.>>Shannon: WHAT YOU MAKE OF THE FEDERAL JUDGES AND YOU CAN’T PUT IT INTO LEGAL TEAM? SOME FOLKS THOUGHT THEY WERE FATIGUED, THEY DIDN’T WANT TO GO WITH THE NEW PLAN. TODAY THE JUDGE SAYS NO, THE ATTORNEYS WHO ARGUED THE CASE ARE STAYING ON THE CASE.>>IF I WERE A JUDGE AND I WANTED TO GIVE PRESIDENT TRUMP MORE AMMUNITION TO CLAIM JUDICIAL BIAS, THIS IS WHAT I WOULD DO. I’VE NEVER REALLY HEARD OF A CASE WHERE THE GOVERNMENT WASN’T ALLOWED TO CHANGE LAWYERS, THE GOVERNMENT CHANGES LAWYERS ON CASES ALL THE TIME TO TRY TO THROW A WRENCH IN SOMETHING AS TECHNICAL AND EASY, TO ME THAT’S WAVING THE RED FLAG AND SAYING GO AHEAD, RUSHED TO THE APPEALS COURT, RUSHED TO THE SUPREME COURT BECAUSE THE DISTRICT COURT JUDGE IS BEING INTRANSIGENT AND IS REVEALING UNFORTUNATELY BIAS BECAUSE HE SHOULD JUST LET THE GOVERNMENT HAVE THE LAWYERS HE WANTS TO.>>WERE WAITING TO SEE WHAT THE MYSTERY IS, ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL, 51-49 ODDS HERE WE WOULD SURVIVE SCRUTINY FROM THE COURT IF THE PRESIDENT ISSUED IT DIRECTLY FROM HIM. I WANT TO DISAGREE WITH THE PROFESSOR ON THE ISSUE OF SWAPPING OUT LAWYERS, THE REASON THE JUDGE HAS CONCERN IS THE FACTUAL ASSERTIONS, THE EXPLANATIONS PROVIDED TO THE COURT, THE ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT WHAT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LAWYERS TOLD THE COURT ABOUT DROP-DEAD DATE, THAT’S WHAT I THINK THE JUDGES CONCERN IS TO BRING IN A NEW LEGAL TEAM. NEVER MIND WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *