- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Should Illegal Aliens count towards congressional representation?
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:16 pm to spacewrangler
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:16 pm to spacewrangler
quote:Is that states doing that or cities doing that? Either way, what about them? That’s their way of playing this political game, and it isn’t the state’s job to do the feds’ job for them.
What about the states like CA that enact sanctuary laws and twart the Fed from being able to find and deport said illegals?
ETA: This issue is weird because it often gets “conservatives” siding with the federal government.
This post was edited on 7/11/19 at 11:18 pm
0
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:24 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Whatever course taught you this nonsense, I suggest that you retake it at a better school
The constitution clearly states that all CITIZENS have the right to vote. Representation in Congress and electoral college votes fit hand in hand with right to vote. So no, constitutionally illegal aliens do not have the right to congressional representation.
Dumbass.
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:27 pm to Mickey Goldmill
quote:
(Quick google....first result is from penn state law..)
Yes, immigrants are protected by the U.S. Constitution. The brief answer is “Yes.” When it comes to key constitutional provisions like due process and equal treatment under the law, the U.S. Constitution applies to all persons – which includes both documented and undocumented immigrants – and not just U.S. citizens.
Yes for other things, not the right to vote which fits hand in hand with congressional representation. Illegal aliens DO NOT have a constitutional right to congressional representation.
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:30 pm to Jax-Tiger
No! This type of madness is why America is at risk of becoming a quasi 3rd world shite hole.
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:35 pm to Muleriderhog
quote:Both Article One and the Fourteenth Amendment say that we count “persons” (NOT “ citizens”) and that we apportion Congressional representation on the basis of that count.quote:The constitution clearly states that all CITIZENS have the right to vote. Representation in Congress and electoral college votes fit hand in hand with right to vote. So no, constitutionally illegal aliens do not have the right to congressional representation.
Whatever course taught you this nonsense, I suggest that you retake it at a better school
Dumbass.
AGAIN, I think it SHOULD be otherwise and that Apportionment should be based upon the number of CITIZENS. My ideological preferences do not alter the words of the written document by one iota.
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:35 pm to Muleriderhog
Then why has the census been counting everyone, even non-citizens, since the 1800s?
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:42 pm to Bass Tiger
quote:Man, dang ol’ queers.
No! This type of madness is why America is at risk of becoming a quasi 3rd world shite hole.
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:43 pm to Muleriderhog
quote:This has not only been determined wrong by the courts, long ago, it doesn't make any sense:
The US constitution strictly applies to US citizens you fricking idiot.
1. There weren't any specific immigration or citizenship laws at the time of constitution, even though natural born citizens (jus soli) were presumed citizens when it refers to things like eligibility for president. So there wasn't really anything in place to actually verify that.
Therefore, do you think the Founding Fathers really put in all of these protections in place only for citizens, without anyway to easily prove citizenship and make it easy for the government to abuse those protections since most wouldn't be able to prove it? Even today, we don't have to walk around carrying an ID like we're some dictatorship to be protected.
2. The constitution only references citizens in select places (e.g., eligibility for president). Do you think the founding father's omitted that term elsewhere, and in many instances, used persons on accident?
3. Do you think the founding father's thought that certain protections like no cruel and unusual punishments, right to a speedy trial, etc. were not intended for anyone? So they were ok with the government throwing any non-citizen in jail and letting them rot without a trial?
4. Since you explicitly said citizens, then that would mean that people who aren't citizens but here admitted legally by the government (e.g., work visas, student visa, permanent residents, tourists, etc.) would not be protected by those rights. How does that make any sense?
5. Most of the rights provided by the constitution are negative rights (right to not be subjected to an action; limits on government). Do you think the founding father's really wanted to limit governments intrusions, yet not only give it the power to not only intrude on some people, give it the ability to make laws to limit those who it can intrude upon by minimizing those who are and who can become citizens?
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:45 pm to Bass Tiger
quote:Yet, they've been counting them since before we were a superpower, as we became a superpower, and since we've become a superpower. But now we're suddenly at risk of becoming a third world country for doing the same thing we've always done?
No! This type of madness is why America is at risk of becoming a quasi 3rd world shite hole.
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:45 pm to Jax-Tiger
No
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:50 pm to Muleriderhog
quote:Yet, the constitution refers to ALL FREE PERSONS to be counted, without any specification of whether they can vote or not. And it explicitly addressed two populations that couldn't vote at the time (slaves and Native Americans who weren't taxed). And slaves were given still given 3/5ths representation (the compromise), despite not even being a free person.
Yes for other things, not the right to vote which fits hand in hand with congressional representation
And besides, those who can't vote would include citizens (e.g., under 18, felons, severe intellectual disabilities, etc.), and would have even included women for most of our history as well.
Posted on 7/11/19 at 11:51 pm to Jax-Tiger
No.
Posted on 7/12/19 at 12:02 am to Carl Kolchak
The Constitution says that all persons living here should be counted as part of the population. And those census figures are to be used to apportion legislative bodies. Non-citizens cannot vote but they are Constitutionally part of the population.
Posted on 7/12/19 at 12:05 am to spacewrangler
quote:I think it could make it even worse if they suddenly changed it so that these populations weren't counted.
What about the states like CA that enact sanctuary laws and twart the Fed from being able to find and deport said illegals?
At least now, everyone is counted the same. But imagine if the Ds get in power and have a chance to pass some immigration reform and pathway to citizenship. Don't you think they would do everything in their power to incentivize immigrants to come to their states and leave the R states then make it easier for immigrants to get citizenship in their states but harder in R (say be enrolled in college).
These figures are completely made up and probably extreme, but I want to show an unintended consequence by Ds some more political power by tying the appropriations to citizenship if they get the chance:
1. Say D states have a 4 million person advantage over (12 million to 8 million; 60%) if they counted illegal immigrants in the census for appropriations.
2.Then D states create incentives give them a larger advantage, say a 12 million person advantage (16 to 4; 75%) and get them in programs that will prepare them for citizenship in preparation for a pathway.
3. Then they pass a pathway to citizenship law that ensures 90% of the immigrants in D states (14.4 million) can easily attain citizenship compared to only 40% in R states (1.6 million). So now they not only have an even larger advantage than before (12.8 million compared to 4 million) they have a larger percentage as well (90% compared to 60%).
Posted on 7/12/19 at 12:08 am to Jax-Tiger
Every illegal counted in a census cancels one citizen's congressional representation.
This post was edited on 7/12/19 at 12:10 am
Posted on 7/12/19 at 12:14 am to Jax-Tiger
Absolutely not
Posted on 7/12/19 at 12:30 am to Jax-Tiger
Hell fricking no.
Posted on 7/12/19 at 12:30 am to Buckeye Jeaux
quote:This doesn't make sense mathematically for numerous reasons (e.g., small percentage of illegals, every state has illegals, takes a lot of people to impact appropriations, large variance in population for appropriations between states, etc.).
Every illegal counted in a census cancels one citizen's congressional representation
Regardless, since the Constitution, as written, specifies ALL FREE PERSONS, even though the USA was a place that attracted immigrants, even before it was an independent nation, and would undoubtedly continue to do so.
So based on the Constitution, which a presume you value, no FREE PERSON can cancel out any other FREE PERSON'S congressional representation.
Posted on 7/12/19 at 12:36 am to Jax-Tiger
Absolutely not,
Posted on 7/12/19 at 1:17 am to Jax-Tiger
Not only no, but any elected official who supports counting them should be executed for treason.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News