Things That Matter

Conservative Cuban-American Federal Judge Tops Trump’s SCOTUS Nominee List

Conservative Cuban judge Barbara Lagoa is said to be towards the top of President Donald Trump’s list of Supreme Court picks. If announced, Lagoa will then undergo a confirmation hearing to fill the seat vacated by Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death.

President Trump is reportedly considering two very conservative women to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s empty seat on the Supreme Court.

Barbara Lagoa, a Cuban-American federal judge, is one of the women President Trump is seriously considering for the Supreme Court nomination. Critics state that President Trump is trying to stack the court to rule conservatively for decades to come. Lagoa was the first Latina to be appointed to the Florida Supreme Court.

Politicians and political pundits are calling on the Senate to follow precedent they set in 2016. During President Obama’s last year in office, the Republican-led Senate refused to confirm a nominee to the Supreme Court following the death of conservative justice Antonin Scalia in March. The argument was that the American people should have the right to decide who fills the seat since it is an election year. In 2020, the same Senate is committing to rushing a hearing as soon as possible.

Lagoa made a name for herself when she worked to fight Elián González’s deportation.

Lagoa, who currently serves on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, worked behind the scenes. Her role in the González fight was in making the argument against the Bill Clinton administration. The judge, like most Cuban-Americans at the time, was desperate to keep González in the U.S. having witnessed the trauma of the Cuban exile diaspora in Miami.

Her position on abortion is up for debate right now.

Lagoa hasn’t had to weigh in on the heavier issues because of her previous positions so it isn’t clear how she’ll rule on abortion matters. However, in her confirmation hearing last year for the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, Lagoa answered question about Roe v Wade.

Senator Dianne Feinstein of California asked Lagoa about the decision and how she would follow it.

“Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), is binding precedent of the Supreme Court and I would faithfully follow it as I would follow all precedent of the Supreme Court regardless of whether it is referred to as ‘super-stare decisis’ or ‘superprecedent,'” Lago wrote in response.

Lagoa did vote to make access voting harder for felons in Florida despite the people voting in 2018.

Lagoa was one of the voting members in the 6-4 ruling of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals that created voting restrictions for felons. The decision was a key legal victory for the Trump administration and Republicans. Lagoa’s vote made it so that felons could only restore their voting rights if they pay their fees and fines, which the state of Florida is not responsible for telling or showing them how to pay them off.

President Trump is expected to make an announcement soon about who he is going to be nominating to the Supreme Court. A political battle is already brewing as both sides of the aisle fight for the seat.

READ: Latino Politicians And Celebrities Mourn The Death Of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Notice any needed corrections? Please email us at corrections@wearemitu.com

Undocumented Residents Could Be Excluded From The 2020 Census After All, Thanks To New Supreme Court Case

Things That Matter

Undocumented Residents Could Be Excluded From The 2020 Census After All, Thanks To New Supreme Court Case

Phil Roeder / Getty Images

The drama over the 2020 Census continues.

First, was a Supreme Court decision that found the Trump administration wasn’t being totally honest about it’s reasoning for including the citizenship question on the 2020 Census – so the court effectively removed the question from the census. 

Then, Trump tried to delay the constitutionally mandated census to give his administration more time to come up with a better reason to tell the courts.

None of that worked as planned by the administration, and the Census has continued as normal. However, so many in minority communities – particularly migrant communities – have been fearful of completing this year’s census. Well, a new Supreme Court case could erase all the progress we made to make sure all residents – regardless of immigration status – were fairly counted.

The Supreme Court will hear a case that could allow the Trump Administration to exclude undocumented residents from Census data.

On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments next month over whether President Trump can exclude undocumented immigrants from the census count used to apportion congressional districts to the 50 states.

The court’s announcement means that the court – which could soon have a 6-3 conservative majority – will hear arguments in the case on November 30.

In July, Trump issued a memorandum asking the Census Bureau to subtract undocumented immigrants from the count for the purposes of congressional apportionment — the reallocation of the nation’s 435 House districts every 10 years. Trump’s memo came after the Supreme Court had rejected his last minute efforts to add a citizenship question to the census.

By the time the high court hears this case, federal Judge Amy Coney Barrett could be confirmed as the ninth justice, cementing a conservative majority. Senate Republicans hope to confirm her nomination to the Supreme Court before the election on Nov. 3.

However, the U.S. Constitution explicitly calls for the counting of all residents within the country.

Credit: Tetra Images / Getty Images

The 14th Amendment requires districts to apportion congressional seats based on “counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.”

Since the first U.S. census in 1790, the numbers of U.S. residents who are counted to determine each state’s share of congressional seats have included both citizens and noncitizens, regardless of immigration status.

“President Trump has repeatedly tried — and failed — to weaponize the census for his attacks on immigrant communities. The Supreme Court rejected his attempt last year and should do so again,” said Dale Ho, a lead plaintiffs’ attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union who successfully argued against the now-blocked citizenship question the administration wanted on the 2020 census forms.

Removing those immigrants from the population counts would shift power to less diverse states. A Pew Research Center study last year found that it could result in House seats that would otherwise be assigned to California, Florida and Texas going instead to Alabama, Minnesota and Ohio — each of which is set to possibly lose a House seat in the next decade due to population shifts.

And drawing new districts within the states based only on the counts of citizens and legal immigrants would likely benefit Republicans, shifting power from cities and immigrant communities to rural parts of the states, which vote for GOP candidates at higher rates

The announcement comes shortly after the court also allowed the Trump Administration to end the Census count early.

Earlier last week, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to stop the census count, blocking lower court orders that directed the count to continue through the end of the month. 

The decision, which the Trump administration favored, came with a candid dissent from Justice Sonia Sotomayor – the court’s only Latina justice.

“Meeting the deadline at the expense of the accuracy of the census is not a cost worth paying,” Sotomayor wrote in her dissent. “Especially when the Government has failed to show why it could not bear the lesser cost of expending more resources to meet the deadline or continuing its prior efforts to seek an extension from Congress. This Court normally does not grant extraordinary relief on such a painfully disproportionate balance of harms.”

But it wasn’t long ago that Trump tried to completely derail this year’s census.

The Trump administration has decided to print the 2020 census forms without a citizenship question, and the printer has been told to start the printing process, Justice Department spokesperson Kelly Laco confirms to NPR.

The move came shortly after the Supreme Court ruled to keep the question off census forms for now and just a day after printing was scheduled to begin for 1.5 billion paper forms, letters, and other mailings.

President Trump had said he wanted to delay the constitutionally mandated headcount to give the Supreme Court a chance to issue a more “decisive” ruling on whether the administration could add the question, “Is this person a citizen of the United States?” A majority of the justices found that the administration’s use of the Voting Rights Act to justify the question “seems to have been contrived.”

Notice any needed corrections? Please email us at corrections@wearemitu.com

Xavier Becerra Will Not Prosecute Women Getting Abortions If Roe V Wade Is Overturned

Fierce

Xavier Becerra Will Not Prosecute Women Getting Abortions If Roe V Wade Is Overturned

Samuel Corum / Getty Images

Americans are closely watching the confirmation hearing of Amy Coney Barrett. The judge has made it clear that she is not in favor of marriage equality, access to abortion, and the right to affordable and life-saving healthcare. California’s attorney general has pledged not to prosecute women for abortions if Roe V. Wade is overturned.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra is standing with women and their right to choose.

AG Becerra was a congressman representing California wen President Donald Trump won the 2016 election. Former California Gov. Jerry Brown called on AG Becerra to leave Congress and come back to California as the attorney general. The move was a clear response to President Trump’s victory and a show that California was gearing up for years of legal battles against the administration.

Politicians and activists are sounding the alarm of Barrett’s alleged willingness to overturn Roe V. Wade.

The Supreme Court secured the future for women when they made the decision on Roe V. Wade. Suddenly, women have safe access to abortions. It closed a dark chapter in American history when women died from botched back alley abortions. Since the decision was made, the GOP has fought for years on local, state, and national levels to reverse the decision and strip women of their healthcare rights.

Concerned citizens are begging for government officials to do something to protect abortion rights.

If Roe V. Wade is overturned, the decisions to allow abortions will be left up to the states. This would negatively impact millions of women who are already struggling to access necessary healthcare in GOP-led states. States like Louisiana and Texas have made it increasingly difficult for women to access abortions in the state.

Americans do support Roe V. Wade.

Sixty-six percent of American adults do not support overturning Roe V. Wade. The decision has had a very real and important impact on the lives of women in the U.S. After decades of dangerous and fatal botched abortions in the U.S., the Supreme Court decision gave women a chance to get safe abortions. The decision afforded women a chance to have control of their futures.

People are grateful to see AG Becerra’s statement on Roe V. Wade.

Abortion is something more and more Latinos have come around too, according to some studies. According to the Latina Institute, a majority of Latinos are in favor of women having the right to choose what is best for them.

What are your thoughts about Roe V. Wade? Let us know.

READ: Latinas Raged Outside Of The Supreme Court To Fight Back At Recent Abortion Bans That Are Unconstitutional

Notice any needed corrections? Please email us at corrections@wearemitu.com