Judge permits a census prosecution, citing evidence of Trump's animosity towards immigrants of color

A federal judge on Thursday authorized a lawsuit against the Trump Judge Jesse Furman of Manhattan's South District said the plaintiffs provided plausible evidence that US authorities intended to discriminate against immigrant communities, due to President Trump's inflammatory statements about immigrants from the region.

The plaintiffs, which include 18 states, the District of Columbia, several cities and advocacy groups, argued that the inclusion of a citizenship issue would ensure that many immigrants would refuse to complete the census, an increased risk in the current political climate because of President Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric. "This refusal to cooperate, critics say, could trigger undercoverage depriving communities of federal funding for critical government services such as schools, roads and bridges."

The Commerce Department asked the judge to dismiss the complaint, arguing in part that the court did not have jurisdiction over the courts "have a vital role to play in examining the conduct of political branches."

Furman ruled that Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross did have the power to add a question of citizenship to the census, but the way in which he exercised that authority, he said, may have violated plaintiffs' rights to equal protection before the law

Ross's decision to add the question of citizenship, said the judge, "was motivated at least by discriminatory animus" and by President Trump himself. A long time after Ross's announcement in March, Donald Trump's reelection campaign sent emails to supporters accusing the president of demanding change.

[Trump’s census, citizenship decision ignites legal and political battle]

Furman wrote that several statements made by Trump in the months before and after Ross's decision could be interpreted. "

Among the examples listed in the lawsuit, there was when Trump referred to immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador, and African countries as" those people from the Shithole countries, "commented. he denied later. Last February, Trump claimed that some immigrants "were horrible. . . They do not give us their best people, people. "

And there was the president's remark in May about some" people coming into the country, or trying to get in. "You would not believe how bad these people are," said Trump. "They are not people, they are animals. . .

Furman acknowledged that none of these statements specifically dealt with the issue of citizenship. "But the law is clear that the mere" use of racist insults, epithets or other racist terms "may be proof that the official action was motivated by illegal discriminatory purposes . "

The judge's opinion marked the latest example of Trump's anti-immigrant words acting against his administration in court.

Time and time again, Trump's inflammatory rhetoric – particularly his tweets – proved to be thorns in the side of his administration in court. In legal wrangling over Trump 's executive actions, such as his travel ban, his transgender military ban, and the ban on sanctuary towns, decisions have repeatedly cited Trump' s legal arguments, such as the fact that he is not the only one. reported the Washington Post Derek Hawkins. On the question of citizenship opposed the administration against many democratic jurisdictions, with large immigrant populations, who fear that the change could make them lose crucial funding and political representation. The decennial census has not asked about citizenship of the general population since 1950, although citizenship status has been asked for surveys among US household samples.

Ross defended the change, saying the data could help identify potential voting rights. violations by providing more accurate information than currently available on the proportion of the population of a congressional district that is eligible to vote under the possession of citizenship. He concluded that "the value of more complete citizenship data outweighs concerns about non-response."

The decision quickly triggered court challenges across the country; At least six lawsuits have been filed to challenge him. Earlier this month, a court order required the Trump administration to provide vital documents and information on the decision to require citizenship.

Ross testified in sworn testimony in March that the Department of Justice had initiated the change. But documents released earlier this week contradicted that, providing further evidence that Ross was pushing to add a citizenship issue to the 2020 census much earlier, and much more actively, he said. The documents also revealed a deeper involvement of senior administration officials, including Trump's former chief strategist, Stephen K. Bannon, in pursuit of the issue, Tara Bahrampour reported on Thursday. . does not mean that the plaintiffs will eventually succeed in their challenge, he said.

A spokesman for the Commerce Department said in a statement to Reuters that the department was "happy that the court had concluded that Secretary Ross had wide authority over the census" and was "confident" the Attorney General of New York, Barbara D. Underwood, one of the main leaders of the trial, celebrated the judge's decision

"Today's decision is a great victory for New Yorkers and all. the world around the country who cares about a fair and accurate census, "Underwood said in a statement. "As we have argued, the Trump administration's plan to require citizenship status in the census is illegal – and this could result in undercoverage that would threaten billions of dollars federal funds and a fair representation from New York to the Congress and the Electoral College. "