4611
Comments (330)
sorted by:
489
50blessings 489 points ago +490 / -1

As a California resident, for fuck's sake, strip California of it's representation.

268
Modus_Pwninz 268 points ago +269 / -1

No shit. All those electoral votes...and half the population hopped the border.

192
81
DCPower 81 points ago +81 / -0

WHAT THE HECK?!!!! Seriously, I'd like to see the law actually applied and all those responsible jailed.

34
peterthegreen 34 points ago +34 / -0

Anonymous tips may be reported on this form and may also be reported to ICE via the toll-free HSI Tip Line, (866) 347-2423: https://www.ice.gov/webform/hsi-tip-form

4
Gyrfalcon 4 points ago +4 / -0

She complained that illegal aliens are not adequately represented in state government, and described her appointment as a step towards correcting that alleged injustice.

Injustice? At least Breitbart uses the legal definition: ILLEGAL

61
unsubd 61 points ago +61 / -0 (edited)

How the hell is an illegal a damn attorney? What the actual fuck. A walking crime.

56
KickingPugilist 56 points ago +56 / -0

Literally. A walking crime litigating crime KEK

🤡

21
unsubd 21 points ago +21 / -0

Literally. Same could be said for most lawmakers.

15
NixonChew 15 points ago +15 / -0

Becuase democrats hate america

-1
Yawnz13 -1 points ago +1 / -2

Wait, where does it say that she's an attorney?

3
unsubd 3 points ago +3 / -0

The first sentence of the article.

Mateo, an attorney, was born in Mexico and came to the U.S. illegally at the age of 14 with her parents, who are also illegal aliens, according to the Sacramento Bee.

11
deleted 11 points ago +11 / -0
2
seejayem 2 points ago +2 / -0

I never understood the idea of illegal immigrants willingly becoming public figures. Like... wouldn’t they want to keep a low profile to avoid being deported?

1
NixonChew 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why would they democret traitors defend and protect them

6
JerryJerryJerry 6 points ago +6 / -0

OUTOUTOUT!

91
UpTrump 91 points ago +91 / -0

I love the custom flairs mods put on top posts now.

ADIOS, AMIGOS!

9
FullAutoFlintlock 9 points ago +9 / -0

Mods been on point with the flai game the past few days.

3
acebart3 3 points ago +3 / -0

The tacos! Dead

2
Mr_Dr_Jullian_Dunbar 2 points ago +2 / -0

We have the best mods and the best flair, believe me.

Two 🌮 🌮 Two🍦 🍦 Two🐸 🐸

63
ProphetOfKek 63 points ago +63 / -0

Just kick the Bay Area and Silicon Valley out, and California would be ok. King Newsom can head his government in exile.

45
ClownTamer 45 points ago +45 / -0

As someone in the Bay, I agree. Pretty much everything wrong with the world and CA right now centers around here. We’d be nuked if everyone heard what people here often say in passing and believe about the rest of America and anyone willing to disagree with them.

And, as you’d expect of a communist dream area, we’ve got people looting and pooping in the street and in general setting us all back hundreds of years. I have higher standards for my dog than our DA has for people out here.

14
DonnieT 14 points ago +14 / -0

LA is annoying because there are shitloads of conservatives here who have no representation.

10
FullAutoFlintlock 10 points ago +10 / -0

Conservatives who spent the last 20 years sitting out local and county elections letting the freaks do what they want because. muh Christian niceness.

9
glow-operator-2-0 9 points ago +9 / -0

High costs of living keeps everyone working.

Proletariat entertainment keeps everyone stupid and ignorant of the governmental process.

2
675-EVIL 2 points ago +2 / -0

Exactly. I despise these 'nice Christians' who allow scum to walk all over them.

1
Hardcouer 1 point ago +1 / -0

Do you despise Jesus?

Not saying Christians shouldn't stand up and be counted more, but suffering evil without dishing it out is a pretty core teaching.

1
675-EVIL 1 point ago +1 / -0

Jesus Had no problem kicking the people out of the temple using a whip.

10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
4
WeShldBeAble2OwnRPGs 4 points ago +4 / -0

My family escaped the bay area where I was born in '94...never looked back. Adios commiefornia!

3
SomaliSwede_RapeBaby 3 points ago +3 / -0

If a nation ever dared invade the west coast, they’d avoid the big naval/military presence in the Pacific NW and San Diego...the soft communist underbelly of SF Bay Area would fold over pathetically and welcome them with open arms before the counter-attack from across the Sierra Nevada

2
RenaissanceOfHope 2 points ago +3 / -1

What do they say about America?

2
ClownTamer 2 points ago +2 / -0

“The US is like, literally, the worst country in America.”

Imagine blaming everything bad that’s ever happened or will happen on America, and you get the gist. It’s like a battle to interpret any and all things as a jab at America. It’s the inverse of a devote Christian. Instead of finding God’s divine plan and focusing on the positive, you take everything as a chance to shit on the one country that puts up with and allows for you to do that.

“Anyone outside of CA and NY is racist, bigoted, stupid trash. Especially white people, because we should burn them.”

2
glow-operator-2-0 2 points ago +2 / -0

You ask them immediately why then did they climb the border wall to come here (to be oppressed)

4
ClownTamer 4 points ago +4 / -0

That’s an easy go to.

“If America’s so bad, why are people killing themselves and doing Mission Impossible level stunts trying to get here? Who the fuck’s trying to get into Mexico or China or any Muslim country? You couldn’t pay most people to live there.”

1
glow-operator-2-0 1 point ago +1 / -0

You know some Commie is going to die of an aneurysm trying to explain that.

0
RenaissanceOfHope 0 points ago +1 / -1

Yeah, they should move to another country.

9
magagama 9 points ago +9 / -0

Hollyweird and LA need to go as well!

5
GulagDweller 5 points ago +5 / -0

Hopefully someday the San Andreas Fault will take care of some of those Devil Worshiping areas.

4
glow-operator-2-0 4 points ago +4 / -0

Check USGS - the fault would wreck SoCal but not affect portions of NorCal.

You want movement on other adjacent faults for that apocalypse to happen.

37
liberty4alll 37 points ago +37 / -0

The best way to do this is for us to flee the state. The state is rewarded by the conservative head count. And what do we get for it? Fires, taxes, mask mandates, and prison-like conditions.

Leave. The. State.

And vote so Red your new neighbors will see what kind of people CA has had all along.

40
50blessings 40 points ago +43 / -3

The problem with leaving is that it creates a super singularity of shit in this state that will metastasize into a virulent cancer that flings rogue cells off into other states as dumbass leftists flee the shit they created and poison other states. California to be fixed or else it will slowly rot this union on its own. People who don't live in CA underestimate the sheer pervasiveness of the retardation that goes on in the liberal strongholds here. I had to live it my whole life, and I grew up in a tiny suburban town so it wasn't even peak bullshit.

14
deleted 14 points ago +14 / -0
3
liberty4alll 3 points ago +12 / -9

I disagree with the idea that leftists leave blue cities/states and continue to vote blue and somehow spread it. I truly believe that is a myth. Instead, I believe it is the inner cities that create leftists. And flyover states create conservatives. Not the other way around. In other words, an average person moving to an inner city will more-than-likely become a Dem voter. And an average person moving to a small town will more-than-likely become a Rep voter.

We are largely the product of our environment.

Therefore, the more people who live outside of major cities, the better chances they’ll vote conservative.

Mega cities are bad for the soul.

16
trump2036 16 points ago +16 / -0

I've lived in the city. It never turned me blue or gay.

6
liberty4alll 6 points ago +7 / -1

You’re preaching to the choir. Being on this site alone proves we’re more vigilant than an average American. I’m talking about the likelihood of the ‘average’ American turning blue.

6
DonnieT 6 points ago +6 / -0

Living in LA my whole life has redpilled me more than could possibly be imagined hahah.

9
80960KA 9 points ago +9 / -0

Living in San Fran for 5 years turned me from a mostly apathetic left-leaning libertarian to a paleocon that wants helicopter rides and mass graves.

4
trump2036 4 points ago +4 / -0

I didn't downvote you, I don't know what makes people go blue. But obviously it happens. My guess is college. Plenty of people send their normal kids to college and get back a liberal asshole in return.

3
Loiuzein 3 points ago +3 / -0

That's the curriculum, infiltrated by the USSR ages ago. It's a self-perpetuation infiltration operation, with no guidance or handlers, spiraling out of control.

3
liberty4alll 3 points ago +4 / -1

This is something I’ve thought about for a long time. Here’s my current theory:

We are born on the Left.

As babies we are greedy, selfish, attention-seeking, immoral, corruptible, manipulative liars.

We want the other kid’s toy. And we want someone else to pay for it. And we don’t want to bear the consequences of our decisions. And we’ll cry til we get our way. And we’ll vote democrat cuz they think like a baby.

We have to actually *mature* to grow out of that.

This is the red-pill moment many of us have had.

Until this eye opening experience happens, we are on the Left by default. College, the media, music, pop culture all reinforce this baby-like state of mind. Unplug from it and we’d mature on our own, and finally #WalkAway.

My 2 cents anyway.

10
Magakong 10 points ago +10 / -0

I grew up in Oregon in the 1980s when it was a conservative, libertarian state.

Look at it now.

9
CA-Patriot 9 points ago +9 / -0

I understand your point, but have to disagree. We are in a very RED county in California. Great living conditions, great schools, etc. There are LOTS of folks from the city moving out here and voting blue. We have seen a big shift over the last 20 years. There is LOTS of push back, but most of the conservatives are older folks and it is the younger hipsters moving out of their self-built shitholes that are invading our peaceful space. (I guess much like folks are invading Texas and Idaho from Cali.)

5
Filetsmignon 5 points ago +5 / -0

Explain Austin TX

8
liberty4alll 8 points ago +8 / -0

As a city’s population rises, so does its tendency to turn Blue. it’s not rocket science. Look it up on any demographic website.

You must acknowledge the correlation is there.

10
WeShldBeAble2OwnRPGs 10 points ago +10 / -0

I've alway thought about this. My opinion is that large population breeds larger government, which naturally breeds leftist big government policy and creates an echo chamber of thought

4
Pandas4Trump 4 points ago +4 / -0

The individualism of northern wheat farming vs the collective nature of southern rice farming. Chairman Mao arising out of rural southern China seems to at least fit the echo chamber hypothesis

6
Filetsmignon 6 points ago +6 / -0

Must also consider that tens of thousands of Californian's have moved to Austin over the last 30 years. I lived there in the 90's. Went back last year. Wow, looks like it's tracking about 10 years behind SF now. So sad to see the decline from the Cali folks piling in.

2
WeShldBeAble2OwnRPGs 2 points ago +2 / -0

I will speak on first hand account in PA where leftists fleeing NY/NJ have 100% brought their politics with them. New Yorkers as we speak are buying up the housing market and making it worse. But this is a case where they left one metro area for another (smaller) metro area... Not really flyover territory per se to your point. Also criminal aliens are playing a big role in making life shittier around here

1
SwordandBored11 1 point ago +1 / -0

The problem is that the conservative silent majority inflates the population, while corrupt rigged elections ensure that there will always be a leftist government running things into the ground. Liberty isn't dead, but it is bound and gagged by those who want it dead, though.

6
MastemaofJerusalem 6 points ago +6 / -0

LA is now a dump. Trash everywhere. They don’t do any street cleaning. Homeless exponentially increased. They’re now on the beaches and boardwalks. You can’t take your family to a picnic without seeing a damn encampment nearby

162
stevejobs871 162 points ago +163 / -1

And the wall is coming along nicely too...almost 400 miles. 4 more years!

135
fasterth 135 points ago +135 / -0

Apparently California could lose 10+ electoral college points because of this ruling, is it true? Because that'd be blessed af.

81
UpTrump 81 points ago +81 / -0

Yes, easily 3M+ aliens. Don't know how many fill the census out, but I know there was a big push to get aliens to complete it

18
MagyarLadyPede 18 points ago +18 / -0

They made extra efforts to Send out Census people to make sure you've filled it out. Although I dont know if this is a regular thing that America does.

We filled it out in Oakland when we lived there then moved, and the census ppl came to our new apt in a different city, we told them we filled it out but at our old residence and they kept trying to make us fill it out again. We declined saying theyd be counting us twice and we're not willing to participate. But, to be fair, im not sure if this is just regular census practice and we were in the wrong. But i dont see why they should count us twice.

6
PinkSnoBalls 6 points ago +6 / -0

Californian here, yes, they send people to your door if you don't fill it out. I hadn't filled out a census since 1980. I refused. I have a locked gate around my property so they couldn't do anything but leave notes. They start threatening you after the 3rd attempt.

14
boxmakingmachines 14 points ago +14 / -0

but I know there was a big push to get aliens to complete it

I live in a Mexican neighborhood and holy hell was there ever one this year.

11
TrumpBringsLight 11 points ago +11 / -0

The AG has said there are at least 10million, which really of course means 20-40M if he’d admit to 10M

29
TheClassicalLiberal 29 points ago +30 / -1 (edited)

Losing 10 electoral votes seems like a lot. They would probably lose about 4 million people which means they would lose about 10% of their electoral votes.

They have 53 electoral votes; that would mean losing 5 or 6 electoral votes leaving them with 47 or 48. (Edited)

Texas has 36 and Florida and NY each have 27.

36
slimcoat 36 points ago +36 / -0

53 - 5 = 57?

53 - 6 = 58?

That's some serious Obama math, fren! :)

11
bobertulus 11 points ago +11 / -0

Cimimmin kore werks

11
sideOfBeef2016 11 points ago +11 / -0

Listen fat, math is racist

9
UpTrump 9 points ago +9 / -0

Common core in action

6
TheClassicalLiberal 6 points ago +6 / -0

Whoops. Thx. That's 47 or 48. :)

4
JimDandy 4 points ago +4 / -0

Shoulda just left the original up there. As a Californian I can tell you that is exactly how any public school students would have answered.

2
TheClassicalLiberal 2 points ago +2 / -0

Whoops. That's 47 or 48. Thx. :)

18
MerlynTrump 18 points ago +18 / -0

CA, TX, FL, and NY could all lose. Plus whatever they lose goes to some other state or group of states. Rust belt states could gain.

4
booblitchutz 4 points ago +4 / -0

This is a good thing

1
MerlynTrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, I read up on it after posting. If only citizens were counted Pres. Trump would have got 310 electoral votes instead of 306. CA would have lost 4, Tx, Fl and Ny would have lost 1 each. Louisiana, Ohio, Missouri, Minnesota, Colorado, Michigan and Montana would have each gained one. https://thepoliticalinsider.com/revealed-the-secret-way-illegals-influence-elections/

https://www.270towin.com/news/2018/03/29/the-electoral-map-if-only-citizens-were-counted_604.html

2
MagyarLadyPede 2 points ago +2 / -0

Your math is off.. common core kid? Lol jk.

1
fkn_lost_my_password 1 point ago +1 / -0

If they lose 10 votes, then they just lost the entire electoral weight of Missouri.

12
deleted 12 points ago +12 / -0
11
Lindarichmond 11 points ago +11 / -0

it's not about electoral votes.

It's about fake balloting to steal the election in critical areas.

Last time they were constrained by the population data when they tried to steal it.

They can only make fake ballots to the max county population.

If they can fabricate unverifiable undocumented residents, they can inflate the number of fake ballots.

It was about the election, not the electors.

6
ToPede 6 points ago +6 / -0

Census has been delayed in my area. Only mailed out postcards happened. No house to house collection for people refusing to provide government with names of all that live I'm house.

1
JimDandy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Are you in a heavy Red district?

1
ToPede 1 point ago +1 / -0

Red suburb of blue county in purple (MI) state.

5
321Temporary 5 points ago +5 / -0

I don't think it'd be nearly that much of a change. Here's an article I read a while back on the subject:

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/07/24/how-removing-unauthorized-immigrants-from-census-statistics-could-affect-house-reapportionment/

Of course, that depends on the estimated number of illegal immigrants being correct....so really, who knows?

29
TrumpMachine9000 29 points ago +29 / -0

President Trump keeping MS-13 gangs out of our country. Think of all the lives saved by stopping the fentanyl and drugs coming across the border.

Liberals whine about COVID deaths, but bring up opiates and fentanyl deaths and they couldn't care less. Obama never lifted a finger to stop fentanyl from Mexico or China.

Trump has saved thousands of lives with border control alone. Not to mention stopping endless wars.

149
CarGuru9898 149 points ago +150 / -1

This should be an absolute slam dunk no brainer. If you aren’t a citizen you shouldn’t be counted. How fucking hard is it to have some semblance of rational thought?

67
GodSaveTheWest 67 points ago +68 / -1

It is rational thought, they want illegals counted because they vote blue. Also it helps raise the house seats and electoral votes in the states illegals keep blue.

18
Lindarichmond 18 points ago +18 / -0

They want illegals "counted" (and indiscernible from citizens) so they can have a untraceable way of inflating population data to allow them to create more fake ballots to steal the election on a critical county-by-county level.

5
The_RedWolf 5 points ago +5 / -0

Both are quite probable and far from exclusive

4
FromBilgewater 4 points ago +4 / -0

They don't have to vote at all. The libtards will vote and get their representation based off of the higher numbers.

24
kag-2020- 24 points ago +24 / -0

Communists gonna subvert the Constitution.

28
UpTrump 28 points ago +28 / -0

ACB claims to be an originalist. The founding fathers meant for this to mean all former slaves only. We'll know if she's the next John Roberts based on her ruling here

15
kag-2020- 15 points ago +15 / -0

Absolutely. We all know how far the Communists have gone with "shall not infringe" too. Activist Justices have eroded our rights everywhere they can.

5
NixonChew 5 points ago +7 / -2

Considering she supported blm, I have a bad feeling about acb

7
Based_Trumpster 7 points ago +7 / -0

What does that even mean, she “supported BLM?”

9
UpTrump 9 points ago +11 / -2

She said she cried over george floyd and acknowledges the "systematic racism"

12
stjimmy92 12 points ago +12 / -0

She didn’t acknowledge systematic racism. She said “any justice system as large as ours will inevitably have racist elements.” Meaning the more people that are involved in a system, the more likely that some will be racists.

5
UpTrump 5 points ago +5 / -0

That's slightly more comforting

6
TrumpBringsLight 6 points ago +6 / -0

I checked the transcripts. The following exchange is on Day 2 when Durbin asked her about systemic racism. She left a lot of wiggle room. imo.

DURBIN: OBVIOUSLY HAS A PASSION FOR HISTORY, I CAN'T IMAGINE YOU COULD SEPARATE THE TWO, TO REFLECT ON THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY. WHERE ARE WE TODAY WHEN IT COMES TO THE ISSUE OF RACE? SOME ARGUE IT IS FINE. EVERYTHING IS FINE, AND YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO TEACH CHILDREN ABOUT THE HISTORY OF SLAVERY AND DISCRIMINATION. OTHERS SAY THERE IS AN IMPLICIT BIAS IT SO MANY ASPECTS OF AMERICAN LIFE THAT WE HAVE TO BE VERY CANDID ABOUT IT AND ADDRESS. OTHERS GO FURTHER AND SAY IT IS SYSTEMIC RACISM, IT IS BUILT INTO AMERICA AND WE HAVE TO BE MUST MORE POINTED IN OUR ADDRESSING IT. HOW DO YOU FEEL?

JUDGE BARRETT: I THINK IT IS AND ENTIRELY UNCONTROVERSIAL AND OBVIOUS STATEMENT, GIVEN THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE GEORGE FLOYD VIDEO, THAT RACISM PERSISTS IN OUR COUNTRY. AS TO PUTTING MY FINGER ON THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM,

WHETHER , AS YOU SAY IT IS OUTRIGHT OR , SYSTEMIC RACISM, OR HOW TO TACKLE THE ISSUE OF MAKING IT BETTER, THOSE THINGS ARE POLICY QUESTIONS. THEY ARE HOTLY-CONTESTED POLICY QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE NEWS AND DISCUSSED ALL SUMMER.

SO AS I DID SHARE MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, VERY HAPPY TO DISCUSS THE REACTION OF THE FAMILY TO THE GEORGE FLOYD VIDEO GIVING BROADER STATEMENTS AND , MAKING BROADER DIAGNOSIS ABOUT THE PROBLEM OF RACISM IS KIND OF BEYOND WHAT I AM CAPABLE OF DOING AS A JUDGE.

3
zabbers 3 points ago +3 / -0

So she's an ignorant fool who doesn't know what really happened, or a virtue signaling cuck who doesn't care? I'm not sure which is better.

1
Wtf_socialismreally 1 point ago +1 / -0

Was not a good trap to fall into, and the question was there for this reason -- to drive a wedge between her and the party.

3
InTheArmsOfThePepe 3 points ago +3 / -0

Uh oh...

2
fkn_lost_my_password 2 points ago +3 / -1

Yeah, just in case anyone else was wondering why Democrats haven't been putting up an actual fight over her, here's your answer. She's going to suck for conservatives and they know it. They just have to keep up appearances for the lefties so they're throwing some light jabs her way. Trump should pull her nom and pick someone else.

2
ProfessorRomendev 2 points ago +2 / -0

I thought they haven't been put up much of a resistance because:

  1. There's literally nothing on her

  2. Them questioning her religion is harsh, but from our perspective, it's not AS nasty as what they did to Kavanaugh, so it just looks like they're going easy on her

  3. They know smearing a justice didn't go over well last time, so they have to hold back a little.

2
TrumpBringsLight 2 points ago +2 / -0

Another poster has given the answer, that she cried with her black children. I’m not sure that’s entirely the same as endorsing BLM.

1
stjimmy92 1 point ago +1 / -0

If they’re taking it now, would she be allowed to take part? I thought you had to have been confirmed before the case was taken up to sit on the ruling.

1
UpTrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

They take it Nov 30

10
Cup_O_Covfefe 10 points ago +10 / -0

The census is supposed to count all residents, but that should be all LEGAL residents. Not all residents of the US have to be citizens per se, but they have to be here "under our jurisdiction" meaning according to the laws.

Illegals should not be counted on the official census. The only counts they should be included on are ICE raid schedules.

6
zabbers 6 points ago +6 / -0

Eh, you can count them. AS ILLEGAL. Just don't give them representation.

1
Cup_O_Covfefe 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, yes, but that wouldn't include them in the Census. The Census is the numbering of the legal residents of the country.

3
DLane1 3 points ago +3 / -0

Not entirely true. Foreign diplomats and their kids are legal residents but don't count as anything since they are "under the jurisdiction" of their home countries. Their kids are not US Citizens either. ALL ILLEGALS are in the same category as they are under the jurisdiction of where they left and must be returned there!

1
Cup_O_Covfefe 1 point ago +1 / -0

Foreign diplomats are not legal residents, they have diplomatic immunity but are technically foreigners who are not beholden to visa limitations.

1
DLane1 1 point ago +1 / -0

Should correct myself in that foreign diplomats are counted on Census Day, but they are not included in apportionment of representation.

Illegal aliens are in the same boat. Counting them is fine, but they should ve subtracted for apportionment. To include them absolutely harms US Citizens by imbalancing the legislature. A district with 10,000 citizens and 1,000,000 illegals should have less representation in Congress than a district with 30,000 citizens.

3
123breadman 3 points ago +3 / -0

All persons = legally in the US

If they can be deported, they don't count.

2
jubyeonin 2 points ago +2 / -0

I have a problem with all residents being counted for representation because they could tip the scales against citizens in elections and could provide corrupt legislators with more money and influence. Citizens as residents of the state should be the only ones who count for representation.

3
Cup_O_Covfefe 3 points ago +3 / -0

Well that goes back to the South wanting equal representation based on their slave populations not just the citizens.

2
jubyeonin 2 points ago +3 / -1

We should use this argument.

7
flashersenpai 7 points ago +7 / -0

Because it's all of a sudden convenient for "living constitution" idiots to be textualists when it says "persons" despite how obviously fucking retarded that would be.

5
Jimmy33 5 points ago +5 / -0

Otherwise every tourist can be counted.

98
Pixel 98 points ago +99 / -1

This will go over as another HUGE win for Trump and America.

75
pmurTJdlanoD 75 points ago +76 / -1

California loses half its house seats 😆

35
soyface_deluxe 35 points ago +35 / -0

holy shit, yep

32
Sargentpilcher 32 points ago +32 / -0

Please. I live in California. I can only get so erect before I have to call a doctor.

6
Cup_O_Covfefe 6 points ago +6 / -0

You can just hop the border and get one for 13 bucks, fren! Return the favor!

2
jayrod21 2 points ago +2 / -0

Only after 4 hours

13
fasterth 13 points ago +13 / -0

o_o wow, that's fucking amazing, I had no idea we could eliminate Commiefornia's power this easily

of course it's easy now that we have SCOTUS, but it really feels like we have the whole power to change everything in our hands right now

edit: I'd like to take a moment to thank GOD for this huge win

10
KekistanPM 10 points ago +10 / -0

I'm hoping! I know it's a concern troll attitude...but I was so sure that the Supreme Court was not going to hold up Obamacare back in the day, too.

10
Cup_O_Covfefe 10 points ago +10 / -0

ACB might end the Roberts' Reign of Terror flipping on key issues.

They've got something very bad on him, my money is on Epstein shit. Imagine if Trump drops that in the next few weeks, Roberts is arrested, and he gets ANOTHER SCOTUS pick!!

2
stjimmy92 2 points ago +2 / -0

Probably why he’s taking it up now. He’ll cuck on it saying that “states rely on their counts in the population and not counting them will bring harm to everyone in the states that lose population.”

2
zabbers 2 points ago +2 / -0

I figured it would go exactly the way it went. The entire IRS enforcement of tax code on individuals is unconstitutional and should have been thrown out, but there was no way the establishment would do that. Having a penalty for insurance is consistent with all the other stupid penalties and credits in the code.

1
Forte 1 point ago +1 / -0

IF the Court rules in Trump's favor. That's a big if.

92
Wemann 92 points ago +93 / -1

Oh man it would be awesome to have illegals never again be counted for representation. Democrats would drop them so fast since it won't gain them more power.

Forest Gump meme: and just like that, Democrats stopped catering to illegals.

42
4moreMAGA 42 points ago +42 / -0

Dems are just going to make them citizens. If they are allowed to take the Presidency and Senate this year, this is tops on their agenda.

7
Work2gethrBiglyOrDie 7 points ago +7 / -0

They want to import hundreds of millions of 3rd worlders into the USA, and covid19 is part of the plan to make it happen. Hurting economies, creating mass starvation, nonstop MSM sob stories, etc.

60
deleted 60 points ago +62 / -2
62
jarvis 62 points ago +62 / -0

It's happening 11/30

30
fasterth 30 points ago +31 / -1

It's clearly coordinated, God bless America.

11
UpTrump 11 points ago +11 / -0

What does that mean for this election cycle? Let's assume they rule in our favor and CA loses 10 seats. But, on November 3 they will already have voted for all the seats. So would this take effect in 2 years?

8
jealousminarchist 8 points ago +8 / -0

Probably yes. The campaigns can easily justify that they have been preparing a strategy and spending for this election a whole year in advance with the previous number in mind. But then again, the SCOTUS can decide however they feel.

5
Cup_O_Covfefe 5 points ago +5 / -0

I believe so, yes. Whenever the census normally re-distributes Reps.

3
jarvis 3 points ago +3 / -0

Good question. I know typicall new congressmen take office January 3rd

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
11
Womp_womp 11 points ago +11 / -0

Is that how it works? If she is seated for arguments can she rule?

8
Cakes4077 8 points ago +8 / -0

If SCOTUS hasn’t heard any arguments for the case before she is seated and she wasn’t involved with the case before it got there, she can rule on it if she wants.

4
jealousminarchist 4 points ago +4 / -0

That is interesting because it could form a tie.

I know of some systems where if the previous holder of the chair has voted then the next holder does not vote if the trial extends past the nomination.

There is nothing real that actually prevents a new judge (whose chair hadn't yet cast a vote) to read all about the case, request information to both parties if she feels it necessary and then cast her vote.

9
uiucrower 9 points ago +9 / -0

Arguments are set for Nov. 30th. Once confirmed, there is no reason why ACB should not be allowed to be part of the hearings.

2
mathteach314159 2 points ago +2 / -0

Does she have to wait for the next session or something like that? I am not sure I am using the right term when ai say session.

4
viridianfrog22 4 points ago +4 / -0

I think I saw it was to be heard on 30 Nov

53
Seabring 53 points ago +54 / -1

It shouldn't even be controversial.

We don't elect people to represent illegal immigrants. We elect people to represent American citizens. End of story.

32
Lurking-My-Life-Away 32 points ago +32 / -0

It's only controversial because it would be bad for democrats.

43
FLYWHEEL_PRIME 43 points ago +44 / -1

God damn how is this even a question??????

Can you imagine telling Washington, Jefferson, and Adams that less than 300 years after they sacrificed everything the republic is distributing wealth to homeless people that don't work and counting illegal aliens as citizens??

This country is fucked, no 2 ways about it

18
NixonChew 18 points ago +18 / -0

Imagine telling the ww2 and ww1 veterans that they died so that democrat traitors would give away the usa to illegal alien vermin

4
CrackaJack 4 points ago +4 / -0

Imagine telling black people that the Democrats are using the civil rights movement to strip them of their freedoms, and they helped.

25
Histrionic_Answer 25 points ago +25 / -0

Easy decision, they don't even need a notepad for it.

7
540k-Again 7 points ago +7 / -0 (edited)

Easy decision, except for two things:

1.) The WH Council's Office isn't at the top of their game here (be it skill level, bluepills, sneks, or what, who knows); the Exec Memorandum is poorly written, it doesn't conform to the Constitution.

2.) The swamp of lawyers in the agencies which argues the cases. So for instance, they like(ly going) to argue on the wrong legal grounds.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-taking-action-ensure-american-citizens-receive-proper-representation-congress/

For instance:

  • The Constitution does not specifically define which persons must be included for the purposes of apportionment and requires only that Representatives be apportioned according to what has long been understood to mean the “inhabitants” of each State.

Actual Memorandum:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/memorandum-excluding-illegal-aliens-apportionment-base-following-2020-census/

The Constitution does not specifically define which persons must be included in the apportionment base. Although the Constitution requires the “persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed,” to be enumerated in the census, that requirement has never been understood to include in the apportionment base every individual physically present within a State’s boundaries at the time of the census. Instead, the term “persons in each State” has been interpreted to mean that only the “inhabitants” of each State should be included. Determining which persons should be considered “inhabitants” for the purpose of apportionment requires the exercise of judgment. For example, aliens who are only temporarily in the United States, such as for business or tourism, and certain foreign diplomatic personnel are “persons” who have been excluded from the apportionment base in past censuses. Conversely, the Constitution also has never been understood to exclude every person who is not physically “in” a State at the time of the census. For example, overseas Federal personnel have, at various times, been included in and excluded from the populations of the States in which they maintained their homes of record. The discretion delegated to the executive branch to determine who qualifies as an “inhabitant” includes authority to exclude from the apportionment base aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status.

THESE ARE swamp snek! ->"The Constitution does not specifically define which persons must be included in the apportionment base."

[Redpill] YES, The CONSTITUTION does specifically say exactly how to count, I've written this many times:

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3:

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.

14th Amend, Clause 2:

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.

Thus, people whom are not legally free to do as they please (and not bound like indentured servants to be free after a period of time); includes illegals, tourists, visa holders, etc. for census count as 3/5ths for taxation and other purposes, but count for zero-Fifths for House representitive apportionment. And no this is not raycist or only about slavery as taught, it's game theory apportionment written into the Constitution.

CATAGORIES:

  • A.) Free Persons = people legally free to do as they please.

  • B.) Indentured Servants = people bound by contract, free afterwards. (Keep in mind the average term in was like 7 years; so over the course of a 10 year census, the average time of 3.5 years left is less than halfway of 5/10 years so makes math sense to also count these as free persons, since in any given 10 year period all will be free.)

  • C.) Indians Not Taxed (aka outside of the Federal Government jurisdiction, still retaining some national sovereignty.)

  • D.) All other persons = Any human being, not counted above is literally ALL OTHER PERSONS. Including prison populations, illegals, slaves, visa holders, anyone with (government/legal) restrictions upon them as they are not free to go about as they please, doing the things free persons do.

Respective Numbers

#1 Add up catagories A & B, and multiply by x1.0

#2 Take Catagory D, and multiply by 3/5ths (aka 60%).

Add together #1 and #2 for taxation purposes (and likely other bureaucratic/red-tape/program purposes) except, Only #1 is used for Representation Apportionment.

[Note: Catagory C is like a set aside, they are not taxed, and not representented because they have (some of) their own sovereignty still.]

MAGA On!

PS just because people violate/ignore the law and Constitution for a long time, doesn't make it right, doesn't make it legal, and doesn't make an excuse for not correcting the errors/violations. Enforce the Constitution as written! And no that's not raycist.

3
wumao 3 points ago +3 / -0

Thanks

23
cluckingducks 23 points ago +24 / -1

They are NOT residents. They are VISITORS. Do you count Aunt Molly and uncle Brian as dependents on your tax returns because they were over for Thanksgiving? No.

18
Cheesemaker 18 points ago +18 / -0

Not a fair comparison as you invited them in. A more fair example is the criminal who broke into your house and then refuses to leave.

4
NixonChew 4 points ago +4 / -0

Another would be the natsocs who marched into poland with the soviets

2
Mayhem 2 points ago +2 / -0

And then shits on your floor and expects you to make dinner for them

6
DeplorableWolverine 6 points ago +6 / -0

You misspelled INVADERS.

3
123breadman 3 points ago +3 / -0

Criminal illegal aliens are not visitors

2
cluckingducks 2 points ago +2 / -0

They sure as fuck aren't residents, and that's my point.

1
OMBOMB 1 point ago +1 / -0

Good analogy

17
LesboPregnancyScare 17 points ago +17 / -0

review? what is there to review

Q: Are you a US citizen

A: If yes, fill out census, if no then dont.

9
Tardigrade 9 points ago +9 / -0

What the hell is that screenname lol.

14
LesboPregnancyScare 14 points ago +14 / -0

LESBO

PREGNANCY

SCARE

2
Teep 2 points ago +2 / -0

This response made me chuckle.

1
CrackaJack 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thank you that's much better

1
Work2gethrBiglyOrDie 1 point ago +1 / -0

Tricked by a rare quality tranny?

4
LesboPregnancyScare 4 points ago +4 / -0

lol, no im a straight male, but a lesbian fancied me and you know the rest.

2
dogcatfud 2 points ago +2 / -0

Don't forget to include Spanish. Pregunta: ¿Eres ciudadano de los Estados Unidos? Responder: Si es así, complete el censo. Si no, no lo complete.

1
LesboPregnancyScare 1 point ago +1 / -0

lol, I remember that exact question "Are you a US citizen" was struck from the 2020 census for being unconstitutional or something.

10
Liberal_Tear_Addict 10 points ago +10 / -0

The Supreme Court last year blocked the president's effort to add a citizenship question to the census, ruling that the administration had not provided an adequate rationale.“

Lame.

3
zabbers 3 points ago +3 / -0

Where in the constitution does it say the Supreme Court is involved in the census?

1
byteflame 1 point ago +1 / -0

The part where it's set up as the body that decides disputes within the other branches.

2
residue69 2 points ago +2 / -0

Roberts.

9
OnlyTrump20 9 points ago +9 / -0

LOL. If illegals have the right to vote, then all of Russia has the right to vote in our election as well.

8
Roadrash 8 points ago +8 / -0

Sad this even needs to be heard by SCOTUS, it’s completely ridiculous to allow illegals a voice in our government.

6
Myrdoc 6 points ago +6 / -0

Read the comments on the link....absurd.

The attitude of the modern Leftist regarding this topic is downright treasonous. They'd abolish our borders, let anyone and everyone in, tax hard working citizens 80% so these leeches can have everything for free,

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
5
BananaWizard 5 points ago +5 / -0

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ENERGYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

5
Nameless_Mofo 5 points ago +5 / -0

Archive link because the Hill is a leftist shithole.

4
Nanteen 4 points ago +4 / -0

Would CA lose what maybe 5 seats and NY lose 4.

But Texas and FL would also probably loose seats.

2
byteflame 2 points ago +2 / -0

We'd take a hit, sure, but that would distribute influence among more "flyover" states, thereby evening out the representation into areas that are becoming very red.

2
CrackaJack 2 points ago +2 / -0

What aboot Canadians? We can get those liberal fucks out of several northern states. And believe me, they vote. (No offence to based Canadians fighting for your Liberty)

4
570dbp 4 points ago +4 / -0

The census law needs to be amended. It is clearly outdated and unconstitutional if illegals are counted. Imagine a presidential election could come down to a single electoral vote difference from California.

4
KeyboardWarrior45 4 points ago +4 / -0

If we were invaded by China/Russia/whatever and they had taken over San FranSHITshow, the Leftists would be demanding we count the Chinese/Russian army in the census too

4
KingDomoro 4 points ago +4 / -0

The Hill is cancer.

1
wumao 1 point ago +1 / -0

Actually I think it's the best left wing place to get their perspective on. I domt agree with their conclusions, but that's where I go to see what the left is saying.

Yes, they are wrong, but they arent actually publishing batshit stories. Typically it's just super left bias of normal events.

4
Pens5times 4 points ago +4 / -0 (edited)

I'm no constitutional lawyer, but to me it makes zero sense to include people who have no legal right to be here in the count that determines congressional representation and federal grant dollars.

1
DLane1 1 point ago +1 / -0

You are right and the Court will have to rule that way because foreign diplomats and families are NOT counted. Illegals are in the same category.

4
Lindarichmond 4 points ago +4 / -0

This is more about padding the numbers to inflate their ability to produce fake ballots. They were constrained by the county populations last time around in 2016.

They had to have this as a backup so when the magic ballots showed up with higher than population numbers, they could also fabricate unverifiable population numbers using the new census data.

This has to be done before the election to be effective.

This is how they plan on stealing the election

3
_Donald-Trump_ 3 points ago +3 / -0

Roberts better not fuck America over again.

3
JuicyfearsMAGA 3 points ago +3 / -0

If the supreme Court rules in favor of illegal immigrants, then we have no constitution.

3
BlindGuyMcSqueezy 3 points ago +3 / -0

Good, because they shouldn’t be counted. Period. It disenfranchises actual citizens.

3
Flptplt 3 points ago +3 / -0

How about we just exclude them from our country? Why in the hell do we let them stay here? There is no greater evidence of how broken the system is than the existence of millions of illegal immigrants on our soil. All due process needs to be suspended, they all need to be deported. Our refugee and asylum policies are being abused.

Illegal immigrants get US taxpayer funded lawyers. Like that makes sense

3
AbrahamLincoln 3 points ago +3 / -0

How is this even a question? They are citizens OF A DIFFERENT COUNTRY.

3
GoldwaterVoter 3 points ago +3 / -0

IIRC, the census never counted ILLEGAL ALIENS until the Census bureau started to do so with no fanfare in 1950's. The constitution says "persons" not citizens, but if CJ Roberts can say "state" means "federal" as he did with ACA, he can certainly rule that framers meant citizens, as their mere head count contributes towards number of state electors which directly affects voting.

It is an abomination to even consider ILLEGAL INVADERS affecting our Electoral College.

3
GenericInsult 3 points ago +3 / -0

Just posting here for future reference.

(So I can laugh at the crying Libs later)

2
viridianfrog22 2 points ago +2 / -0

lol dems keep the house then lose it when we get rid of those congressional districts.

2
Eatinglue 2 points ago +2 / -0

How are they going to determine tbis since SCOTUS wouldn’t let them ask citizenship on the census?

2
Zynac 2 points ago +2 / -0

Why would they count. They are not citizens.

2
deleted 2 points ago +3 / -1
2
Zenweaponry 2 points ago +2 / -0

We need to stop giving non-citizens the rights we have as citizens. It's that simple. Otherwise our citizenship means nothing.

2
Zero_Six_Two 2 points ago +2 / -0

the constitution is for citizens

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
ncstatesman 2 points ago +2 / -0

Wish Amy was seated

3
ntvl 3 points ago +3 / -0

she will be, the hearing is for oct 30, 4 days after confirmation.

1
ncstatesman 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thank God...and I mean God!

2
trex554 2 points ago +2 / -0

Non citizens shouldn't get congressional representation. Period.

2
Myrdoc 2 points ago +2 / -0

This would devastate the Democrat Party's seats in Congress, holy fuck make it so SCOTUS.

2
TheSuperStableGenius 2 points ago +2 / -0

Exactly why I refused 3 times to answer the census, 3 times I told the census guy to kick rocks. Now the census is over, did my part to offset 3 illegals.

2
007kingifrit 2 points ago +2 / -0

the entire point of a country is to put its own people ahead of outsiders; if it doesn't do that it has no reason to exist

2
Anyone3427 2 points ago +2 / -0

Wtf is there to look at, they have no right to influence how many reps a state have, the only right they have is the one to be deported.

1
lilree 1 point ago +1 / -0

oh my lanta my emotions are fuming right now. no human is illegal. even my wife and her bvll thinks so when he lets me talk to them

2
findthewarmspot 2 points ago +2 / -0

Why is this even a fucking question??? GTFO!!

2
MechaCornpop 2 points ago +2 / -0

Love the flair

2
QuietSpark 2 points ago +2 / -0

How does this even need to be reviewed? Illegals aren’t citizens and representation is based on citizens.

2
lilree 2 points ago +2 / -0

Fuck yeah! Go MAGA Daddy!

2
tufftoffee 2 points ago +2 / -0

Brave new world now boys. The North and West are going to lose seats like crazy and the South is going to actually gain seats.

Crazy crazy times we are living in. I know the democrats don't want that.

Vote in good people. The power shift is changing big time and the last thing we need are corrupt "leaders."

2
downwithcommies 2 points ago +2 / -0

It’s as if Us citizens should start adding 2 “people” for every one citizen in our household to not be diluted by illegals