Justice Ginsburg Alludes to Decision on Next Census Citizenship Question

WASHINGTON – Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Friday that Anthony Kennedy's retreat, last year, was "the event that will have the most impact for the current term." and maybe for many others. "

She spoke about the annual meeting of 2nd circuit judges and lawyers, which includes the states of New York, Connecticut and Vermont. Kennedy was replaced by Brett Kavanaugh, the second highest presidential candidate of President Donald Trump, who is more conservative than Kennedy.

Frankly and habitually, Ginsburg also seemed to indicate how she could vote in the legal battle to determine whether the Trump administration could add a citizenship question to the 2020 census form that is sent to each household. A total of 18 states are contesting the plan, saying it would discourage the responses of legal and illegal immigrants, thus reducing the accuracy of the population enumeration.

Ginsburg said the case is "of enormous importance."

Summing up the two parties to the dispute, she adds the following conclusion: "The speculators noted that last year, in the Trump v. Hawaii case, the Court upheld the alleged ban on travel, in a opinion with great deference to the executive in the case of the census, argued that a decision in favor of (Trade) Secretary (Wilbur) Ross would go beyond the point of rupture ".

And she seemed to sympathize with the advocates of political reform who urge the Supreme Court to rule that states can go too far by using partisanship to map the political boundaries of US House and State Legislature seats. .

"In any case, from a legal point of view, partisan gerrymandering is challenging the fundamental principle that people elect their representatives, not the other way around," Ginsburg said.

Three weeks remaining, the court has not yet announced its decisions in 27 cases. In addition to the census and political reshuffle issues, the court will also decide whether a huge concrete cross may remain on public lands in the Washington suburbs and whether separate lawsuits in a state court and a federal court will violate the law. protection of the Constitution against double jeopardy.