>>> WELCOME BACK TO "HARDBALL." PRESIDENT TRUMP REFUSING TO TAKE
NO FOR AN ANSWER, IS DEMANDING
THAT HIS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
FIND A WAY TO CIRCUMVENT THE
SUPREME COURT AND GET A
CITIZENSHIP QUESTION ON THE 2020
CENSUS.
CENSUS. EARLY THIS MORNING, THE
PRESIDENT TWEETED "THE NEWS
REPORTS ABOUT THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMERCE DROPPING ITS QUEST TO
PUT THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION ON
THE CENSUS IS INCORRECT, OR TO
STATE IT DIFFERENTLY, FAKE.
WE ARE ABSOLUTELY MOVING
FORWARD, AS WE MUST, BECAUSE OF
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ANSWER TO
THIS QUESTION.
THIS QUESTION. WELL, HIS TWEET DIRECTLY
CONTRADICTED HIS SECRETARY OF
THE COMMERCE, WILBUR ROSS, WHO
SAID THIS IN A STATEMENT
YESTERDAY.
YESTERDAY. "THE CENSUS BUREAU HAS STARTED
THE PROCESS OF PRINTING THE
DESENNIAL QUESTIONNAIRES.
DESENNIAL QUESTIONNAIRES. QUOTE, WE AT THE DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED TO
EXAMINE WHETHER THERE IS A PATH
FORWARD.
FORWARD. ANOTHER FROM THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT EXPLAINED, QUOTE, THE
TWEET THIS MORNING WAS THE FIRST
I HAD HEARD OF THE PRESIDENT’S
POSITION.
POSITION. I DO NOT HAVE A DEEPER
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THAT
MEANS.
MEANS. I CAN TELL YOU THAT I HAVE
CONFIRMED THAT THE CENSUS BUREAU
IS CONTINUING THE PROCESS OF
PRINTING THE QUESTIONNAIRE
WITHOUT A CITIZENSHIP QUESTION.
WELL, LAST WEEK THE SUPREME
COURT REJECTED THE SUPREME
COURT’S STATED REASON FOR ADDING
THE QUESTION CALLING IT
CONTRIVED.
CONTRIVED. THE ADMINISTRATION ARGUED THAT
THE CITIZEN QUESTION WAS
NECESSARY TO PROTECT VOTERS AND
ENFORCE PARTS OF THE VOTING
RIGHTS ACT.
RIGHTS ACT. I’M JOIN ERIN BLAKE AND KIM
WHALEY, LAW PROFESSOR AND AUTHOR
OF THE NEW BOOK "HOW TO READ THE
CONSTITUTION AND WHY."
THAT’S A TIMELY BOOK.
LET ME GO TO AARON FIRST.
OKAY.
OKAY. IS IT GOING TO BE IN THE CENSUS
QUESTION FOR 2020, THE
CITIZENSHIP QUESTION?
CITIZENSHIP QUESTION? >> AS OF RIGHT NOW, THE
GOVERNMENT IS MOVING FORWARD,
AND THEY ARE PRINTING THE CENSUS
WITHOUT THIS QUESTION.
THEY SEEM TO THINK THEY CAN DO
THAT RIGHT NOW AND STILL PURSUE
SOME KIND OF A COURT CASE.
IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT THE SUPREME
COURT RULED LAST WEEK, IT WAS
NOT THERE ARE UNDER NO
CIRCUMSTANCES THAT YOU CAN
ACTUALLY DO THIS.
IT WAS THE JUSTIFICATION THAT
YOU PROVIDED WAS CONTRIVED.
IT WASN’T GOOD ENOUGH.
IT WASN’T THE ACTUAL REASON.
BASICALLY, YOU FABRICATED THIS
ENTIRE THING.
ENTIRE THING. BUT JOHN ROBERTS, THE CHIEF
JUSTICE WHO WROTE THIS DECISION
ALLOWED FOR THEM TO POTENTIALLY
COME BACK THROUGH THE COURT
SYSTEM AND MAKE ANOTHER CASE,
OFFER ANOTHER JUSTIFICATION.
THE QUESTION FROM THERE IS DO
THEY HAVE ENOUGH TIME, BECAUSE
THIS NEEDS TO START BEING
PRINTED.
PRINTED. IT’S DUE BY APRIL 2020.
AND ALSO, ARE THEY GOING TO BE
ABLE TO COME UP WITH A VALID
JUSTIFICATION THAT DOESN’T
COMPLETELY FLY IN THE FACE OF
WHAT THEY JUST TOLD THESE
JUDGES.
JUDGES. AND PATIENTLY THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT DECIDED THIS WAS NOT
POSSIBLE.
POSSIBLE. THEY DIDN’T HAVE ENOUGH TIME,
AND THEY ACTUALLY TOLD THIS
JUDGE ON TUESDAY THAT THEY WERE
DONE, AND THEN THE PRESIDENT
TWEETED ON WEDNESDAY, HE SAID
THAT THIS WAS NOT A SETTLED
ISSUE.
ISSUE. HE WANTED PEOPLE TO LOOK FOR
ISSUE -- WAYS TO MAKE THIS
HAPPEN.
HAPPEN. AND THAT PUT THESE LAWYERS IN
THE POSITION OF BASICALLY GOING
BACK TO THIS JUDGE AND OFFERING
A MEA CULPA SAYING WE ARE GOING
TO TRY SOMETHING.
WE DON’T KNOW WHAT IT IS.
I DON’T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE
PRESIDENT IS TALKING ABOUT, BUT
WE’RE STILL MANY THIS GAME RIGHT
NOW.
NOW. >> SO THEY’RE DOING TWO THINGS
AT THE SAME TIME.
THEY’RE PRINTING THE EXISTING
FORMAT OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE,
WHICH DOES NOT INCLUDE A
QUESTION ABOUT CITIZENSHIP.
MEANWHILE, THEY’RE FIGHTING THE
COURT CASE THAT SOME HOPE THEY
CAN GET IT OVERTURNED.
WHY DO THEY DO THIS?
WHY DO THEY WANT THE CITIZENSHIP
QUESTION IN THERE POLITICALLY?
>> WELL, POLITICALLY, IT LOOKS
LIKE FROM THE RECORD THAT THEY
WANT TO BASICALLY MAKE IT HARD
FOR NONCITIZENS TO ACTUALLY
ANSWER THE QUESTION AND THEN BE
COUNTED FOR THE CENSUS, BECAUSE
THE CENSUS NUMBERS ARE USED FOR
PURPOSES OF REAPPORTIONING
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS.
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS. >> TO SCARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE
FAMILY MEMBERS WHO ARE
UNDOCUMENTED INTO NOT
PARTICIPATING, AND THEREFORE NOT
BUILDING UP THE POPULATION OF
THOSE AREAS WHERE THEY LIVE.
>> CORRECT.
>> CORRECT. AND THE CENSUS ITSELF IS ABOUT
COUNTING HEADS.
COUNTING HEADS. IT’S NOT ABOUT COUNTING
CITIZENS.
CITIZENS. I DON’T THINK EVERYONE
UNDERSTANDS THAT.
UNDERSTANDS THAT. IT’S NOT LIKE THAT IS
IMPOSSIBLE.
IMPOSSIBLE. >> YOUHAVE YOU HAVE A CONGRESSIO
SEAT THAT REPRESENTS 600,000
PEOPLE?
PEOPLE? >> UNDER THE ENUMERATION CLAUSE,
IT’S ABOUT COUNTING PEOPLE.
IT DOESN’T FORBID GETTING
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THE
CENSUS FORM.
CENSUS FORM. THAT’S THE ISSUE.
>> DO YOU THINK THE AVERAGE
TRUMPITE UNDERSTANDS THIS KIND
OF PUSH?
OF PUSH? >> NO, I TEACH THIS KIND OF LAW.
AGENCY MIGHT HAVE LAW.
IT’S VERY, VERY COMPLICATED.
>> WHO IS GOING TO VOTE FOR
TRUMP WHO WOULDN’T NORMALLY VOTE
FOR TRUMP BECAUSE HE IS
ANSWERING A CITIZENSHIP QUESTION
ON YOUR CENSUS?
>> I THINK VERY FEW.
BUT IF THIS CONTINUES DOWN THIS
ROAD WHERE IT COULD GO, THAT IS
THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES FLOUTING A SUPREME COURT
DECISION.
DECISION. THE JUDGE IN THIS HEARING SAID
WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO DO, ISSUE
AN INJUNCTION TELLING THE
PRESIDENT TO STOP TWEETING IN A
MAN THEY’RE IS INCONSISTENT?
>> I THOUGHT THEY HAD TO COME UP
WITH A BETTER ARGUMENT ISN’T
THAT STILL THE CASE?
>> YEAH, THAT’S BASICALLY WHAT
THEY HAVE TO DO.
>> CAN THEY BE HONEST AND SAY
WE’RE DOING THIS FOR POLITICAL
REASONS?
REASONS? THE POWER PROGRESSIVE MINORITY
VOTERS?
VOTERS? CAN THEY SAY THAT?
>> THAT WAS ACTUALLY A THEORY
AFTER THESE DECISIONS LAST WEEK.
NOT ONLY DID THAT DECISION COME
DOWN THAT DAY, BUT THE PARTISAN
GERRYMANDERING CASE CAME DOWN.
THE COURT BASICALLY GAVE THE
COURTS AUTHORITY TO DO PARTISAN
GERRYMANDERING.
GERRYMANDERING. WHY COULDN’T THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT COME FORWARD AND SAY
YEAH, WE DID THIS BECAUSE WE
WANTED TO HELP REPUBLICANS.
>> YOU MEAN IT?
>> THERE ARE LEGAL EXPERTS WHO
THOUGHT THAT WAS A POTENTIAL
ARGUMENT THEY COULD MAKE.
THE PROBLEM FOR THE TRUMP
ADMINISTRATION RIGHT NOW IS
WHATEVER JUSTIFICATION THEY
OFFER, THEY HAVE TO SQUARE WITH
WHAT THEY SAID BEFORE.
IF THEY COME FORWARD FOR A
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT JUSTIFICATION, THEY’RE ADMITTING
WHAT THEY SAID BEFORE WAS TOTAL
NONSENSE, IT WASN’T THEIR
JUSTIFICATION AND THAT’S A TOUGH
ARGUMENT.
ARGUMENT. >> THIS REMINDS ME OF THE MUSLIM
BAN.
BAN. THE FIRST TIME NO MUSLIMS COULD
GET IN THE COUNTRY, NO, WE
BETTER FIX THAT.
NOW WE’LL JUST HAVE COUNTRIES
THAT HAVE ACTIVE TERRORIST
WATCHES GOING ON.
>> BUT JOHN ROBERTS LEFT IT.
HE SAID THAT THE SECRETARY OF
COMMERCE HAS BROAD AUTHORITY TO
PUT QUESTIONS ON THE CENSUS.
THEY JUST BASICALLY HAVE TO
OFFER AN ACTUAL JUSTIFICATION.
I THINK IT WAS ACTUALLY A PRETTY
BROAD DOOR THAT HE LEFT OPEN FOR
THIS QUESTION.
THIS QUESTION. BUT WE DIDN’T KNOW IF THERE WAS
GOING TO BE ENOUGH TIME FOR
THEM.
THEM. WE DIDN’T KNOW IF THEY COULD
COME FORWARD.
COME FORWARD. >> IS THIS PART OF THE
REPUBLICAN PARTY RECOGNIZING
THAT THEY’RE BECOMING A SMALLER
GROUP OF OLDER WHITE PEOPLE
BASICALLY, RECOGNIZE THAT THAT’S
THE REALITY SO, THEY HAVE TO
CHEAT?
CHEAT? THEY HAVE TO CHEAT THROUGH
GERRYMANDERING.
GERRYMANDERING. THEY HAVE TO CHEAT THROUGH
SUPPRESSION EFFORTS LIKE PLASTIC
ID CARDS, YOU HAVE TO COME WITH
AN ID CARD, GETTING OLD PEOPLE
WHO LIVE IN ROW HOUSES TO GO
SOMEWHERE AND THE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION BUILDING TO GET
AN ID CARD.
ALL THIS IS JUST TO REDUCE THE
MINORITY VOTE.
MINORITY VOTE. >> WELL, THAT’S THE ARGUMENT.
I’M NOT A POLITICAL ANALYST.
BUT I THINK THAT IS CERTAINLY
WHAT THE RECORD WAS DEVELOPED IN
THIS PARTICULAR CASE SUGGESTED.
AND ACTUALLY, THIS AS A MATTER
OF LAW IS KIND OF AN
OUT-OF-THE-BOX DECISION BY
JUSTICE ROBERTS.
JUSTICE ROBERTS. THE COURT HELD THAT THE STATED
RATIONALE UNDER THE STATUTE WAS
ACTUALLY OKAY.
ACTUALLY OKAY. THEY CAN GIVE WHATEVER RATION
NAT THEY WANT, AS LONG AS IT’S
LEGITIMATE.
LEGITIMATE. THE PROBLEM IS THE COURT SAID
THERE IS BAD FAITH HERE IN
ACTUALLY REACHING OUT AND
MANUFACTURING THIS VOTING RIGHTS
ACT.
ACT. >> DO YOU AGREE WITH AARON, IT’S
POSSIBLE THIS COURT, A 5-4
REPUBLICAN COURT SAY YEAH, IT’S
GOOD REPUBLICAN PARTNERSHIP, GO
AHEAD?
AHEAD? >> I THINK NOT IN THIS CASE ON
THIS RECORD.
THIS RECORD. I THINK IT WOULD HAVE TO BE IN
TEN YEARS, FRANKLY, OTHERWISE
THEY’RE REALLY UNDERMINING THE
RULE OF LAW.
>> HOW DOES THE HOUSE LOOK RIGHT
NOW?
NOW? WE’RE GOING HAVE A CENSUS NEXT
YEAR THAT DOESN’T HAVE THE
QUESTION IN IT?
>> THERE IS BASICALLY NO WAY
THEY CAN DELAY THIS.
THE REAL DEADLINE IS OCTOBER
31st.
31st. THIS IS BEING PRINTED RIGHT NOW.
OSTENSIBLY THEY COULD THROW IT
ALL AWAY, WASTE THE MONEY AND
REPRINT IT.
REPRINT IT. BUT OCTOBER 31st IS THE REAL
DEADLINE WHERE THEY REALLY HAVE
TO HAVE A RESOLUTION ON IN.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH, AARON
BLAKE.
BLAKE. THANK YOU, KIM FOR COMING IN.
WHAT IS THE NAME OF YOUR BOOK?