Census confirms: 63 percent of ‘non-citizens’ on welfare

Discussion in 'Politics' started by peilthetraveler, Dec 3, 2018.

  1. Last edited: Dec 3, 2018
    elderado, Poindexter and LacesOut like this.
  2. Good question. The answer: one of the worst Supreme Court decisions in history, and that is saying a lotm considering all the crap that body has vomited up over the years.

    Graham v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 365 (1971), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court determined that state restrictions on welfare benefits for legal aliens but not for citizens violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court invalidated an Arizona law that required citizenship or 15 years of residence to receive welfare benefits. The 9-0 decision was written by Harry A. Blackmun.[1]

    The state argued that rational basis review should apply, which would require the non-citizen to prove that the law served no conceivable legitimate state interest, or alternatively that the law was not rationally related to the government's purpose. However, the court applied the strict scrutiny standard, holding, "Aliens as a class are a prime example of a 'discrete and insular' minority for whom such heightened judicial solicitude is appropriate."[2]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_v._Richardson
     
    Clubber Lang likes this.
  3. Cuddles

    Cuddles

    Center for immigration studies is proven eugenics garbage. Try again

    Brb let me put out KKK pamphlets as facts
     
    Tony Stark and exGOPer like this.
  4. gwb-trading

    gwb-trading

    Are you denying the 2014 Survey of Income and Program Participation information which comes directly from the Census Bureau - https://www.census.gov/sipp/

    [​IMG]
     
  5. Cuddles

    Cuddles

    No I'm denying the selective spin CIR/FAIR put on their census "study". Anyone can make pretty graphs in Excel

    https://www.cato.org/blog/fairs-fiscal-burden-illegal-immigration-study-fatally-flawed

    See these outfits give themselves pretty names and twist the findings of legitimate statisticians in hopes of some of that legitimacy rubbing off. It fools people who don't care to look to deep into it. Works too, as Trump has filled a ton of positions with these racist pseudo scientists.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2018
    Tony Stark and exGOPer like this.
  6. gwb-trading

    gwb-trading

    So this is your defense for denying data and charts that come directly from the U.S. Census Bureau.
     
  7. UsualName

    UsualName

    If you only right wingers didn’t deny data and charts coming from NOAA and DOD about climate change...
     
  8. LacesOut

    LacesOut

    There’s a difference between statistics and science.
    Leftists don’t seem to understand this. Or they are purposefully obtuse.
     
    CaptainObvious likes this.
  9. Cuddles

    Cuddles

    you link the census....my arguments is the chart did not come from the census but was put together by CIR fudging the numbers and quoting the census as their "source". Hence the statement "anyone can make pretty charts in excel"

    https://www.cis.org/Report/63-NonCi...ail&utm_term=0_7dc4c5d977-92e1453f6d-45092257'

    Here's one of your "researchers"
    https://americasvoice.org/blog/judge-calls-out-camarota/
     
    #10     Dec 4, 2018