On the tie-in between the Census, Sanctuary Cities and Refusal to Enforce Immigration Laws

lady-liberty-crying

The United States is currently engaged in a polarized tempest that has broken down its ability to maintain its borders. Unfair and ineptly applied immigration laws are not reformed, rather, they are apparently manipulated and abused for blatant political purposes, tearing us asunder under the guise of the latest version of divide and conquer, the most nefarious version yet, “Identity Politics”, designed not to resolve the serious problems involved, but to segregate is into neatly manipulable voting blocs through deliberate campaigns of disinformation implemented by the institution that we really on to permit us to exercise our democratic duties (they are not and should not be rights to be exercised at our whim). I refer of course, to the propaganda apparatus that has replaced what you used to be the free and independent Press.

Two critical current issues converge at this point in time, the census called for to allocate representation in the House of Representatives, and the laws governing entry of non-United States nationals into the United States.

Section II of the Fourteenth Amendment seems to indicate that only citizens eligible to vote may be counted in the census taken every ten years at least for purposes of allocation representation in the House of Representatives, see the specific text which amends Article I Section II paragraph 3.

Section 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. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Since non-citizens (among others) may not vote in any of the foregoing cases, they may not be counted for purposes of apportionment. How then is it not legal and appropriate, even required for such determination to be made? Of course, the Supreme Court, being more a politburo than a judicial institution, can by a vote of five persons among our more than three hundred million, determine that black is white, night is day, or anything they like, notwithstanding our own cognitive abilities.

Logically, it would appear that Mr. Trump (with whose policies I rarely agree) is right on this issue and is further correct that he must use whatever means are available to adjust gross census numbers to comply with the specific requirements involved. That Mr. Obama subtlety removed the citizenship question from the census by eliminating the long form version and that the Democratic Party, through encouragement of unauthorized immigration, sanctuary cities, etc., seems determined to pack states likely to vote for their party’s candidates (even without counting illegal voters) with increased representation in the House of Representatives seems to be a deliberate tactic to violate such requirements, for blatant and illegal political purposes.

A factual analysis such as this explains a great deal. Not that Republicans do not tend to be more racist and xenophobic than Democrats, but that issue is a red herring. And unfortunate refugees, whether economic, political or cultural are both the bait and the ammunition, nothing more.

How very, very sad. We need real immigration reform, enforceable but also fairly enforced, with enough resources allocated to eliminate unconscionable waiting periods, but the immigration issue is too tempting a tool for the unethical power mongers among us to resist. With reference to separation of children from parents, that is terrible, but perhaps less so when parents deliberately put their children at risk, whether they be citizens committing crimes or foreigners entering the country under fraudulent albeit perhaps not immoral pretenses, kind of like thieves who rob others in order to feed their families.

Is it possible we will come to our senses and throw the rascals who govern us out, rascals at least as often Democrat as Republican? And perhaps pass a constitutional amendment depriving them of their citizenship and casting them adrift as stateless persons?

Now that would be justice!!!!
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2019; all rights reserved. Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia although he has primarily lived in the United States of America (of which he is a citizen). Until recently he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales. He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies). He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at http://www.guillermocalvo.com.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s