Law US 2020 census will be printed without citizenship question

Article

The Supreme Court found Thursday that the Trump administration did not give an adequate reason for adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census, blocking the question for at least the time being.

The move is a surprise win for advocates who opposed the question's addition, arguing it will lead to an inaccurate population count. The administration had argued the question was needed to enforce the Voting Rights Act (VRA).

The justices sent the issue back to the Commerce Department to provide another explanation.

Chief Justice John Roberts joined with the court's liberal wing in delivering the court's opinion.



Roberts wrote "that the decision to reinstate a citizenship question cannot be adequately explained in terms of [the Department of Justice's] request for improved citizenship data to better enforce the VRA."

"Several points, considered together, reveal a significant mismatch between the decision [Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross] made and the rationale he provided."

Roberts pointed to evidence showing that Ross, whose department oversees the census, intended to include a citizenship question on the census "about a week into his tenure, but it contains no hint that he was considering VRA enforcement in connection with that project."



And he noted that the Justice Department didn't indicate any interest in the citizenship data until contacted by Commerce officials, and that the evidence "suggests that DOJ's interest was directed more to helping the Commerce Department than to securing the data."

"Altogether, the evidence tells a story that does not match the explanation the secretary gave for his decision," Roberts wrote.

"In the Secretary's telling, Commerce was simply acting on a routine data request from another agency. Yet the materials before us indicate that Commerce went to great lengths to elicit the request from DOJ (or any other willing agency)," he continued. "And unlike a typical case in which an agency may have both stated and unstated reasons for a decision, here the VRA enforcement rationale-the sole stated reason-seems to have been contrived. We are presented, in other words, with an explanation for agency action that is incongruent with what the record reveals about the agency's priorities and decisionmaking process."



However, the chief justice said that the decision to add the citizenship question was not "substantively invalid."

"But agencies must pursue their goals reasonably," Roberts said. "What was provided here was more of a distraction."

While Trump officials had pointed to the VRA as reason to add the citizenship question, critics argued that asking about citizenship status would lead to an undercount of the total population. Census data is used for items like drawing congressional districts and allocating federal funds to states, and opponents said an inaccurate population count would harm Americans and cause some to not receive needed funds.



Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elana Kagan, the liberal members of the court, joined on the part of Roberts's opinion opposing the question.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

In a dissenting opinion, Thomas wrote that, "For the first time ever, the court invalidates an agency action solely because it questions the sincerity of the agency's otherwise adequate rationale."

"This conclusion is extraordinary," he wrote. "The court engages in an unauthorized inquiry into evidence not properly before us to reach an unsupported conclusion."

Groups that had challenged the citizenship question's addition to the census in court quickly celebrated the ruling.

New York Attorney General Letitia James, whose state had led the lawsuit presented before the Supreme Court, said that because of Thursday's ruling "the census will remain a tool for delivering on our government's promise of fairness and equity, and states, like New York, will not be shortchanged out of critical resources or political representation."

"Our democracy withstood this challenge, but make no mistake, many threats continue to lie ahead from the Trump administration and we will not stop fighting. Now, more than ever, the marginalized, the disenfranchised, and everyday people need us to stand firm in our fight for justice. After all, everyone counts, and therefore, everyone must be counted."

The ruling is handed down as the Commerce Department says it has a deadline of June 30 - Sunday - to start printing census materials.

And it comes as another lawsuit challenging the question plays out in federal court in Maryland.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that a district judge in Maryland could review whether there was a discriminatory intent behind the question's addition, in light of new evidence filed in the lawsuit. That opens the door for the judge to potentially block the question on those grounds, as it's a different legal question than the one presented to the Supreme Court.

That new evidence pertains to late Republican redistricting strategist Thomas Hofeller, as documents were recently uncovered from Hofeller's hard drives as part of a separate lawsuit in North Carolina that indicate he played a previously undisclosed role in the orchestration of the citizenship question.

The documents indicate that Hofeller conducted an unpublished study in 2015 that found asking about citizenship would help Republicans in redistricting, while hurting Latinx communities and Democrats.

It also suggests that Hofeller may have helped in the drafting of a memo used by the Trump administration to argue for the citizenship question. And emails also show that a Census Bureau staffer was in touch with Hofeller about the citizenship question back in 2015.

Documents relating to Hofeller's role have been filed in a pair of separate lawsuits challenging the citizenship question, in federal court in New York and Maryland. The New York lawsuit was the case under consideration by the Supreme Court

The ACLU has notified the Supreme Court of the evidence. And it requested that the justices send the case back down to a lower court, to allow new evidence to be officially added to the lawsuit - a motion the court is scheduled to discuss during a private conference Thursday.

But the Trump administration asked the justices to rule on whether the addition of the question violates equal protection claims, in an effort to preempt any action out of a lower court.

Groups challenging the citizenship question in federal court in Maryland also requested late Wednesday that District Judge George Hazel issue a preliminary injunction by Friday to block the question from appearing on the census.

Hazel, an Obama appointee, has asked the Trump administration to reply to that request by 8 p.m. Thursday.

Tldr the Court ruled the argument for why should the question be added was bad so it got blocked, it may still pass if a better argument is made up
EDIT: It will be officially printed without the question

EDIT 2: according to Trump that was fake news

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

So wait... because the Supreme Court said it was legal for the United States to collect Citizenship data for the census, they'll end up doing it not through a question on the census itself but through other means?

Does... does this mean that it can't be challenged by some hawaiian judge or whatever?

is... is california gonna lose congresspeople?

OMFG could you imagine if the dems lost any hope of a majority ever again because they're totally dependent on illegal votes?

Maybe then they'd take a somber look at themselves and move back to classic liberalism. Or more likely they're gonna triple and quadruple down and call for aborted babies to be counted as democratic votes or some shit...

 

[Capsaicin Addict]

Source

Aaaand Trump just signed an Executive Order to negate the citizenship question on the census and go for a more compiled system of accessing the requisite information through all other available departments. Nice try, though!

I'm a little lost as to what this means. Pretend I'm an idiot (I know, not hard) and explain it to me?

 

[InvertedDickEnthusiast]

I'm a little lost as to what this means. Pretend I'm an idiot (I know, not hard) and explain it to me?

tl;dr USGOV is going to use all of the data they have access to to determine citizenship status rather than a question on census itself, since house seats are apportioned by citizens and not residents, legal or otherwise, Trump still wins.

 

[George Floyd Sneed]

I would be in favor of curbing executive order powers if it meant nationwide injunctions are gone. Seems mind blowing that the country is not run by the Commander in Chief but some unelected asshole from Honolulu or Portland.

 

[ConfederateIrishman]

Source

Aaaand Trump just signed an Executive Order to negate the citizenship question on the census and go for a more compiled system of accessing the requisite information through all other available departments. Nice try, though!

So... this sounds good (potentially);

So how will this inevitably go wrong?

Does the Government even competent enough to gather this data?
What stops Gov. Workers from fudging the numbers because they want to spite Trump?
What stops people from stalling this out past the census?
What bullshit power will the Supreme Court pull out of their asses this time?
How do conservatives think they can conserve anything when the Supreme Court just gives itself more powers that no one contests and the judges always bend to outside political pressure during controversial cases?

, I need more drinks.

 

[Shadfan666xxx000]

Bureaucrats are bureaucrats even in political issues. Everyone of these fuckers has someone looking over their shoulders and a lot to lose from fucking up too dearly especially if the presidency is directly looking into it. They cant pull too much shit on anybody today.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Bureaucrats are bureaucrats even in political issues. Everyone of these fuckers has someone looking over their shoulders and a lot to lose from fucking up too dearly especially if the presidency is directly looking into it. They cant pull too much shit on anybody today.

You are being quite optimistic there, I hope you're right.

 

[PN 801]

AG Barr is probably the best thing to have happened to trump he is a fucking beast..

 

[X Prime]

I thought house seats wee determined by census numbers and a formula Can this even affect house seats?

 

[It's HK-47]

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Purpose. In Department of Commerce v. New York, No. 18-966 (June 27, 2019), the Supreme Court held that the Department of Commerce (Department) may, as a general matter, lawfully include a question inquiring about citizenship status on the decennial census and, more specifically, declined to hold that the Secretary of Commerce’s decision to include such a question on the 2020 decennial census was “substantively invalid.” That ruling was not surprising, given that every decennial census from 1820 to 2000 (with the single exception of 1840) asked at least some respondents about their citizenship status or place of birth. In addition, the Census Bureau has inquired since 2005 about citizenship on the American Community Survey — a separate questionnaire sent annually to about 2.5 percent of households.

The Court determined, however, that the explanation the Department had provided for including such a question on the census was, in the circumstances of that case, insufficient to support the Department’s decision. I disagree with the Court’s ruling, because I believe that the Department’s decision was fully supported by the rationale presented on the record before the Supreme Court.

The Court’s ruling, however, has now made it impossible, as a practical matter, to include a citizenship question on the 2020 decennial census questionnaire. After examining every possible alternative, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Commerce have informed me that the logistics and timing for carrying out the census, combined with delays from continuing litigation, leave no practical mechanism for including the question on the 2020 decennial census.

Nevertheless, we shall ensure that accurate citizenship data is compiled in connection with the census by other means. To achieve that goal, I have determined that it is imperative that all executive departments and agencies (agencies) provide the Department the maximum assistance permissible, consistent with law, in determining the number of citizens and non-citizens in the country, including by providing any access that the Department may request to administrative records that may be useful in accomplishing that objective. When the Secretary of Commerce decided to include the citizenship question on the census, he determined that such a question, in combination with administrative records, would provide the most accurate and complete data. At that time, the Census Bureau had determined based on experience that administrative records to which it had access would enable it to determine citizenship status for approximately 90 percent of the population. At that point, the benefits of using administrative records were limited because the Department had not yet been able to access several additional important sets of records with critical information on citizenship. Under the Secretary of Commerce’s decision memorandum directing the Census Bureau “to further enhance its administrative record data sets” and “to obtain as many additional Federal and state administrative records as possible,” the Department has sought access to several such sets of records maintained by other agencies, but it remains in negotiations to secure access. The executive action I am taking today will ensure that the Department will have access to all available records in time for use in conjunction with the census.

Therefore, to eliminate delays and uncertainty, and to resolve any doubt about the duty of agencies to share data promptly with the Department, I am hereby ordering all agencies to share information requested by the Department to the maximum extent permissible under law.

Access to the additional data identified in section 3 of this order will ensure that administrative records provide more accurate and complete citizenship data than was previously available.

I am also ordering the establishment of an interagency working group to improve access to administrative records, with a goal of making available to the Department administrative records showing citizenship data for 100 percent of the population. And I am ordering the Secretary of Commerce to consider mechanisms for ensuring that the Department’s existing data-gathering efforts expand the collection of citizenship data in the future.

Finally, I am directing the Department to strengthen its efforts, consistent with law, to obtain State administrative records concerning citizenship.

Ensuring that the Department has available the best data on citizenship that administrative records can provide, consistent with law, is important for multiple reasons, including the following.

First, data on the number of citizens and aliens in the country is needed to help us understand the effects of immigration on our country and to inform policymakers considering basic decisions about immigration policy. The Census Bureau has long maintained that citizenship data is one of the statistics that is “essential for agencies and policy makers setting and evaluating immigration policies and laws.”

Today, an accurate understanding of the number of citizens and the number of aliens in the country is central to any effort to reevaluate immigration policy. The United States has not fundamentally restructured its immigration system since 1965. I have explained many times that our outdated immigration laws no longer meet contemporary needs. My Administration is committed to modernizing immigration laws and policies, but the effort to undertake any fundamental reevaluation of immigration policy is hampered when we do not have the most complete data about the number of citizens and non-citizens in the country. If we are to undertake a genuine overhaul of our immigration laws and evaluate policies for encouraging the assimilation of immigrants, one of the basic informational building blocks we should know is how many non-citizens there are in the country.

Second, the lack of complete data on numbers of citizens and aliens hinders the Federal Government’s ability to implement specific programs and to evaluate policy proposals for changes in those programs. For example, the lack of such data limits our ability to evaluate policies concerning certain public benefits programs. It remains the immigration policy of the United States, as embodied in statutes passed by the Congress, that “aliens within the Nation’s borders [should] not depend on public resources to meet their needs, but rather rely on their own capabilities and the resources of their families, their sponsors, and private organizations” and that “the availability of public benefits [should] not constitute an incentive for immigration to the United States” (8 U.S.C. 1601(2)). The Congress has identified compelling Government interests in restricting public benefits “in order to assure that aliens be self-reliant in accordance with national immigration policy” and “to remove the incentive for illegal immigration provided by the availability of public benefits” (8 U.S.C. 1601(5), (6)).

Accordingly, aliens are restricted from eligibility for many public benefits. With limited exceptions, aliens are ineligible to receive supplemental security income or food stamps (8 U.S.C. 1612(a)). Aliens who are “qualified aliens” — that is, lawful permanent residents, persons granted asylum, and certain other legal immigrants — are, with limited exceptions, ineligible to receive benefits through Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, and State Children’s Health Insurance Program for 5 years after entry into the United States (8 U.S.C. 1613(a)). Aliens who are not “qualified aliens,” such as those unlawfully present, are generally ineligible for Federal benefits and for State and local benefits (8 U.S.C. 1611(a), 1621(a)).

The lack of accurate information about the total citizen population makes it difficult to plan for annual expenditures on certain benefits programs. And the lack of accurate and complete data concerning the alien population makes it extremely difficult to evaluate the potential effects of proposals to alter the eligibility rules for public benefits.

Third, data identifying citizens will help the Federal Government generate a more reliable count of the unauthorized alien population in the country. Data tabulating both the overall population and the citizen population could be combined with records of aliens lawfully present in the country to generate an estimate of the aggregate number of aliens unlawfully present in each State. Currently, the Department of Homeland Security generates an annual estimate of the number of illegal aliens residing in the United States, but its usefulness is limited by the deficiencies of the citizenship data collected through the American Community Survey alone, which includes substantial margins of error because it is distributed to such a small percentage of the population.

Academic researchers have also been unable to develop useful and reliable numbers of our illegal alien population using currently available data. A 2018 study by researchers at Yale University estimated that the illegal alien population totaled between 16.2 million and 29.5 million. Its modeling put the likely number at about double the conventional estimate. The fact is that we simply do not know how many citizens, non-citizens, and illegal aliens are living in the United States.

Accurate and complete data on the illegal alien population would be useful for the Federal Government in evaluating many policy proposals. When Members of Congress propose various forms of protected status for classes of unauthorized immigrants, for example, the full implications of such proposals can be properly evaluated only with accurate information about the overall number of unauthorized aliens potentially at issue. Similarly, such information is needed to inform debate about legislative proposals to enhance enforcement of immigration laws and effectuate duly issued removal orders.

The Federal Government’s need for a more accurate count of illegal aliens in the country is only made more acute by the recent massive influx of illegal immigrants at our southern border. In Proclamation 9822 of November 9, 2018 (Addressing Mass Migration Through the Southern Border of the United States), I explained that our immigration and asylum system remains in crisis as a consequence of the mass migration of aliens across our southern border. As a result of our broken asylum laws, hundreds of thousands of aliens who entered the country illegally have been released into the interior of the United States pending the outcome of their removal proceedings. But because of the massive backlog of cases, hearing dates are sometimes set years in the future and the adjudication process often takes years to complete. Aliens not in custody routinely fail to appear in court and, even if they do appear, fail to comply with removal orders. There are more than 1 million illegal aliens who have been issued final removal orders from immigration judges and yet remain at-large in the United States.

Efforts to find solutions that address the immense number of unauthorized aliens living in our country should start with accurate information that allows us to understand the true scope of the problem.

Fourth, it may be open to States to design State and local legislative districts based on the population of voter-eligible citizens. In Evenwel v. Abbott, 136 S. Ct. 1120 (2016), the Supreme Court left open the question whether “States may draw districts to equalize voter-eligible population rather than total population.” Some States, such as Texas, have argued that “jurisdictions may, consistent with the Equal Protection Clause, design districts using any population baseline — including total population and voter-eligible population — so long as the choice is rational and not invidiously discriminatory”. Some courts, based on Supreme Court precedent, have agreed that State districting plans may exclude individuals who are ineligible to vote. Whether that approach is permissible will be resolved when a State actually proposes a districting plan based on the voter-eligible population. But because eligibility to vote depends in part on citizenship, States could more effectively exercise this option with a more accurate and complete count of the citizen population.

The Department has said that if the officers or public bodies having initial responsibility for the legislative districting in each State indicate a need for tabulations of citizenship data, the Census Bureau will make a design change to make such information available. I understand that some State officials are interested in such data for districting purposes. This order will assist the Department in securing the most accurate and complete citizenship data so that it can respond to such requests from the States.

To be clear, generating accurate data concerning the total number of citizens, non-citizens, and illegal aliens in the country has nothing to do with enforcing immigration laws against particular individuals. It is important, instead, for making broad policy determinations. Information obtained by the Department in connection with the census through requests for administrative records under 13 U.S.C. 6 shall be used solely to produce statistics and is subject to confidentiality protections under Title 13 of the United States Code. Information subject to confidentiality protections under Title 13 may not, and shall not, be used to bring immigration enforcement actions against particular individuals. Under my Administration, the data confidentiality protections in Title 13 shall be fully respected.

Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to develop complete and accurate data on the number of citizens, non-citizens, and illegal aliens in the country. Such data is necessary to understand the effects of immigration on the country, and to inform policymakers in setting and evaluating immigration policies and laws, including evaluating proposals to address the current crisis in illegal immigration.

Sec. 3. Assistance to the Department of Commerce and Maximizing Citizenship Data. (a) All agencies shall promptly provide the Department the maximum assistance permissible, consistent with law, in determining the number of citizens, non‑citizens, and illegal aliens in the country, including by providing any access that the Department may request to administrative records that may be useful in accomplishing that objective. In particular, the following agencies shall examine relevant legal authorities and, to the maximum extent consistent with law, provide access to the following records:

(i) Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services – National-level file of Lawful Permanent Residents, Naturalizations;

(ii) Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement – F1 & M1 Nonimmigrant Visas;

(iii) Department of Homeland Security – National-level file of Customs and Border Arrival/Departure transaction data;

(iv) Department of Homeland Security and Department of State, Worldwide Refugee and Asylum Processing System – Refugee and Asylum visas;

(v) Department of State – National-level passport application data;

(vi) Social Security Administration – Master Beneficiary Records; and

(vii) Department of Health and Human Services – CMS Medicaid and CHIP Information System.

(b) The Secretary of Commerce shall instruct the Director of the Census Bureau to establish an interagency working group to coordinate efforts, consistent with law, to maximize the availability of administrative records in connection with the census, with the goal of obtaining administrative records that can help establish citizenship status for 100 percent of the population. The Director of the Census Bureau shall chair the working group, and the head of each agency shall designate a representative to the working group upon request from the working group chair.

(c) To ensure that the Federal Government continues to collect the most accurate information available concerning citizenship going forward, the Secretary of Commerce shall consider initiating any administrative process necessary to include a citizenship question on the 2030 decennial census and to consider any regulatory changes necessary to ensure that citizenship data is collected in any other surveys and data-gathering efforts conducted by the Census Bureau, including the American Community Survey. The Secretary of Commerce shall also consider expanding the distribution of the American Community Survey, which currently reaches approximately 2.5 percent of households, to secure better citizenship data.

(d) The Department shall strengthen its efforts, consistent with law, to gain access to relevant State administrative records.

Sec. 4. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Nice. Yeah, there's no fucking way that this entire idea was slapped together inside of a week or two, this looks like it was the plan the entire time.

 

[UQ 770]

I often wonder why we didn't annex Mexico altogether. They seem to hate Central and South American spics as much as the rest of us, and that border would certainly have been a lot easier to build a wall across than a giant fuckoff stretch of wasteland in the desert.

 

[Recoil]

As usual, the dems wanna be able to keep their slaves.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Yeah, there's no fucking way that this entire idea was slapped together inside of a week or two, this looks like it was the plan the entire time.

Whether or not your version of events with "Trump the chessmaster" is real, it's fun to read. Really though it's much funnier to imagine Trump just blundering around and getting what he wants because everyone else is pants on head retarded.

It is weird to imagine Trump writing something so... sane and logical, I know it's probably a lot of boilerplate but still. Picturing him talking like a non retarded person is weird.

 

[Übertroon]

I often wonder why we didn't annex Mexico altogether. They seem to hate Central and South American spics as much as the rest of us, and that border would certainly have been a lot easier to build a wall across than a giant fuckoff stretch of wasteland in the desert.

Well it's filled with Mexicans

 

[UQ 770]

Whether or not your version of events with "Trump the chessmaster" is real, it's fun to read. Really though it's much funnier to imagine Trump just blundering around and getting what he wants because everyone else is pants on head exceptional.

It is weird to imagine Trump writing something so... sane and logical, I know it's probably a lot of boilerplate but still. Picturing him talking like a non exceptional person is weird.

I'm pretty sure he has a stenographer or something. Also I'm learning quickly that when you put an entertainer up against a politician the politician loses every fucking time. I'm pretty sure Trump was elected because he's specifically not a politician.

 

[It's HK-47]

Whether or not your version of events with "Trump the chessmaster" is real, it's fun to read. Really though it's much funnier to imagine Trump just blundering around and getting what he wants because everyone else is pants on head exceptional.

It is weird to imagine Trump writing something so... sane and logical, I know it's probably a lot of boilerplate but still. Picturing him talking like a non exceptional person is weird.

If you want to see what Donald Trump acts like when he's not wearing "The Donald" mask, just go back to his old interviews, before he invented that bombastic personality to throw people off.

 

[CaesarCzech]

Trump is going to hammer down How much Blacks are impacted by illegal imigration. Demographics long united must divide, And Democratic party will be remade in Fire. Ashes will fall on the throne.

Aaanyway

If i were trump i would play Supreme court justice card again and used this as ammo, Since obviously that Swing justice is Deepstater.

Also part of legal imigration population hates illegals so each resource spent on Illegals pisses of part of legals meaning Democrats really should be running demographic analitics.

 

[Marchesa of the Vast]

I often wonder why we didn't annex Mexico altogether. They seem to hate Central and South American spics as much as the rest of us, and that border would certainly have been a lot easier to build a wall across than a giant fuckoff stretch of wasteland in the desert.

It's a big country with mountains and deserts sitting in between the continental United States and the core parts of the country.
The US also had to deal with territorial disputes along the northern border in the race to settle and claim to the Pacific.

I'd also put down that Mexico is a seemingly eternally politically unstable country. Whoever said that if Mexico wasn't sitting next to the world's biggest economy they'd be another Afghanistan was right on.

 

[Fek]

This plus Trump closing the loophole that let states like California allow citizens to count their state/local income tax against their federal income taxes is going to fuck these yuppie strongholds into the dirt and I can't wait.

Yeah the Midwesterner in me definitely holds a special bit of unfettered wrath towards the "holier than thou," "shit doesn't stink," "high on their own farts" coastal city strongholds rife with illegal alien activity. I hope that when this is all said and done, and it turns out huge portions of the coastal populations (especially the West Coast) aren't even citizens, that the Trump administration makes those places feel it for years to come.

Fuck every last one of those commies.

 

[Your Weird Fetish]

Someone in the Jewdiciary will file a nationwide injunction (which shouldn’t be a thing that can be done) then Trump will issue an empty threat that goes nowhere. Rinse and repeat.

Eh I hate the nationwide injunctions stopping stuff like this but at the same time it'll be nice when gun grabbers take over congress and the whitehouse and a random judge in Alabama stops them from violating our second amendment rights.

I often wonder why we didn't annex Mexico altogether. They seem to hate Central and South American spics as much as the rest of us, and that border would certainly have been a lot easier to build a wall across than a giant fuckoff stretch of wasteland in the desert.

As always, it was the slavery question fucking us up. Slave holders didn't want a bunch of non-slave states added.