Census vs. Rights

azlaw · 03-19-2010, 02:08 PM

Usually the squabbling over cesus information is related to the very critical issue of Federal districts for purposes of Congressional representation or jury pooling. Those matters frequently come before the SCOTUS (Supreme Court Of The United States). The Census Bureau has along history of asking questions outside of art 1, but the current "long form" census questionnaires really get some peoples' goat - health questions, do you ride a bicycle, race, etc.

The issue of whether or not a person can be compelled to answer the Census is well settled. See U.S. v. Sharrow, 309 F.2d 77 ( C.A.N.Y. 1962)(Cert. denied 372 U.S. 949). Not that they are looking to prosecute, but if you are a census protestor, and you mail an affidavit to the U.S. Attorney proclaiming that you refuse to answer, then they might bust you.

A recent overview of how to dismantle the Article I, 1st Amt, and 14th Amt arguments may be found at Morales v. Daley, 116 F.Supp.2d 801 (S.D.Tex. 2000). Notwithstanding the high-sounding words in the old railroad case cited, the controlling law on the 4th Amt issue is presently Wyoming v. Houghton, 526 U.S. 295, 299, 119 S.Ct. 1297(1999), which basically says "Hey, Congress can do that, suck it up." This doctrine derives from a landmark case that we may have all read about in High School called McColluch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819), which basically says that Congress can do what it thinks "necessary and proper" unless there is a clear violation of the terms of the Constitution and that the courts must not otherwise interfere with the governance of the country.

Bottom line is: Answer the Census, we're counting on you - or else! And if you don't like it, call your congressman.

H

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

03-19-2010, 02:08 PM	#6
azlaw User Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 207 Thanks: 1 Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts	Usually the squabbling over cesus information is related to the very critical issue of Federal districts for purposes of Congressional representation or jury pooling. Those matters frequently come before the SCOTUS (Supreme Court Of The United States). The Census Bureau has along history of asking questions outside of art 1, but the current "long form" census questionnaires really get some peoples' goat - health questions, do you ride a bicycle, race, etc. The issue of whether or not a person can be compelled to answer the Census is well settled. See U.S. v. Sharrow, 309 F.2d 77 ( C.A.N.Y. 1962)(Cert. denied 372 U.S. 949). Not that they are looking to prosecute, but if you are a census protestor, and you mail an affidavit to the U.S. Attorney proclaiming that you refuse to answer, then they might bust you. A recent overview of how to dismantle the Article I, 1st Amt, and 14th Amt arguments may be found at Morales v. Daley, 116 F.Supp.2d 801 (S.D.Tex. 2000). Notwithstanding the high-sounding words in the old railroad case cited, the controlling law on the 4th Amt issue is presently Wyoming v. Houghton, 526 U.S. 295, 299, 119 S.Ct. 1297(1999), which basically says "Hey, Congress can do that, suck it up." This doctrine derives from a landmark case that we may have all read about in High School called McColluch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819), which basically says that Congress can do what it thinks "necessary and proper" unless there is a clear violation of the terms of the Constitution and that the courts must not otherwise interfere with the governance of the country. Bottom line is: Answer the Census, we're counting on you - or else! And if you don't like it, call your congressman. H