[ad_1]
The census t-shirts are displayed during an event. (Brian Snyder / Reuters)
The Justice Department reacted on Monday to allegations that it had concealed the real motives of the government to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census, saying the border was frivolous.
In a document filed in US District Judge Jesse Furman of the Southern District of New York, Justice Department lawyers accused lawyers of challenging the "derailment" attempt of the Supreme Court decision. expected by the end of the month.
This letter comes four days after new evidence establishes a connection between the issue of citizenship and Thomas Hofeller, a Republican strategist, and two days before the hearing scheduled by Furman, one of three federal judges who spoke against the issue earlier this year.
Counsel for the plaintiffs contesting the matter wrote to Furman on Thursday morning asking him to impose sanctions on the defendants.
Records discovered in Hofeller's affairs after his death in August revealed that he "had played a significant role in orchestrating the addition of the citizenship issue to the decennial census of 2020 in order to create a structural electoral advantage for, in his own words, "Republicans and non-Hispanics". The whites, "said the plaintiffs' attorney.
The attorneys said that the administration officials had relied on a study conducted in 2015 by Hofeller, concluding that the addition of this phrase "would clearly be a disadvantage for Democrats" and would benefit the white Republicans in redistricting. The lawyers said that Hofeller then defended the idea with the Trump government in 2017, contradicting the sworn testimony of the trade advisor Wilbur Ross's adviser, A. Mark Neuman, and the senior Department of Justice, John Gore, as well as other testimonies of the accused. The lawyers also wrote that the Trump administration had used a motive suggested by Hofeller – the application of the law on voting rights – to justify the issue, that a letter from the 2017 Department of Justice Justice asking him to use Hofeller's words almost verbatim and that officials had deliberately concealed the role of Hofeller in court. procedure.
[House committee to vote on holding Barr and Ross in contempt for failing to provide documents related to 2020 Census citizenship question]
In a six-page letter to Furman, Justice Department lawyers denied the charges. "The plaintiffs provide no evidence that Gore ever read, received, or was even aware of the existence of this unpublished study," Justice Department lawyers wrote. "There is no gun to smoke here, only smoke and mirrors."
Any connection between Hofeller's study and the Justice Department letter of 2017 was "imagined".
The letter filed Monday also argued that it was "too late to reopen the evidence in this case already closed," adding that "the plaintiffs are not entitled to a repossession".
Opponents of the question stated that this would remove responses to the survey of immigrant communities, which would result in undercoverage in the areas where they live.
The population of the decennial census is used to allocate $ 800 billion a year in federal funds, as well as to determine representation and division in Congress.
A key problem in challenging the citizenship issue is the way it has been added. Ross had initially told Congress that his decision to add it had been made only in response to the Justice Department's request of December 2017, but lawsuits had subsequently been filed stating that Ross, who oversees the Census Bureau had insisted for months on this question.
The letter also stated that the plaintiffs' lawyers had misrepresented Hofeller's study. Rather than analyzing the effects of adding a question on citizenship, Mr. Hofeller analyzed the effects of replacing the representation of all residents by citizens of voting age. He also wondered why the plaintiffs' lawyers had waited until last week to present their evidence, which they apparently had since February.
On April 23, the Supreme Court heard the case. The evidence led to argument that day and it appeared that the Conservative majority seemed inclined to agree with the Government that the decision to add the matter fell within the competence of the Secretary of Commerce.
If the court followed the normal procedure, it voted this week on the outcome of the case and the judges are drafting their opinion.
Robert Barnes contributed to this report.
[ad_2]
Source link