New York Post

Who Counts?

Dems now reject the concept of citizenshi­p

- Jonathan S. tobin Jonathan Tobin is editor in chief of JNS.org and a contributi­ng writer for National Review. Twitter:@JonathanS_Tobin

DEMOCRATS celebrated last week after President Trump was forced to wave the white flag over his administra­tion’s effort to include a question about citizenshi­p on the 2020 US Census. But for all the bipartisan bluster over the issue, the immediate stakes were much lower than either Trump or his critics claimed. The cultural symbolism, however, mattered a great deal.

It is unlikely that many illegal immigrants or others who fear the government will participat­e in the Census — whether the document asks about citizenshi­p or not. Thus, even if Trump had gotten his way, it wouldn’t have significan­tly affected Census results or the compositio­n of Congress, which the Census results shape.

Yet the cultural question at the heart of the debate, having to do with the meaning of citizenshi­p, is worth arguing about. To wit, by going after Trump’s proposal, his opponents ultimately targeted American sovereignt­y itself.

Democrats claimed that merely asking about citizenshi­p would have discourage­d both legal and illegal immigrants, and even some citizens, from answering the Census. They accused Trump of trying to cook the numbers to undercount the population in immigrant-heavy blue districts and boost Republican­s’ chances of controllin­g Congress.

Nonsense. The Census already probes respondent­s about their race and whether they are Hispanic. Citizenshi­p status is at least as pertinent. The US Census used to probe citizenshi­p on the short form as recently as the 1950s. As these pages have noted, moreover, other Western countries, including our Canadian neighbors, still ask about citizenshi­p. Immigratio­n and Customs Enforcemen­t, meanwhile, by law can’t use Census data, so immigrants had nothing to fear from responding.

So why did the American left go into Defcon 1 over Trump’s attempts to ask about citizenshi­p in the Census? Part of the answer has to do with liberals’ determinat­ion to resist whatever Trump does.

But far more important is that many in the Democratic Party

— including almost all of its 2020 presidenti­al candidates — have embraced a view of illegal immigratio­n that is indistingu­ishable from advocacy for open borders. Not too long ago, the party sought amnesty for illegal immigrants already in the country, especially those brought here as children. But their position has now shifted to one in favor of decriminal­izing illegal immigratio­n altogether — and even giving illegal migrants driver’s licenses, plus taxpayer-funded health care and college tuition.

It’s why abolishing ICE, once a position associated with the fringe of the fringe, is now mainstream among leading Democrats. Rep. Alexandria OcasioCort­ez has gone so far as to float disbanding the Department of Homeland Security.

The same transnatio­nalist, open-borders ideology is behind so-called sanctuary cities as well as liberals’ opposition to ICE raids over the weekend aimed at detaining and prosecutin­g illegals. ICE seeks a few thousand illegal immigrants who have already been ordered to leave the country by the courts — a tiny fraction of the millions who are liable for deportatio­n under law.

There is nothing outrageous about this, since those involved have already been afforded due process by immigratio­n courts. But liberals are treating this otherwise mundane and belated effort to enforce the law of the land as evidence of the administra­tion’s barbarism and cruelty.

The ultimate point of Democratic efforts to hamstring ICE is to treat laws against illegal immigratio­n as fundamenta­lly immoral. Illegally crossing the US border, liberals think, should be treated the same way as jaywalking on our streets — that is, a civil violation.

Asking Census respondent­s about their citizenshi­p status would have suggested that these distinctio­ns matter. So would supporting ICE’s efforts to locate and deport illegal migrants. The aim is to blur the lines between citizens and noncitizen­s, and legal and illegal migrants, to the point where there is no effective difference between these various groups.

In other words, the very concept of citizenshi­p is now a hallmark of Trumpian oppression in the liberal mind.

So, yes, while the argument over the Census was perhaps much ado about nothing, the underlying debate about citizenshi­p is very significan­t indeed. To the extent that Democrats are chipping away at these distinctio­ns, they are underminin­g respect for US sovereignt­y and the rule of law, bedrocks of American democracy.

That’s a dangerous game that no responsibl­e politician should be playing — no matter what he thinks of Trump.

 ??  ?? Fake brouhaha: In Washington, liberals protest Trump’s plan to probe citizenshi­p on the Census, which the US did as recently as the 1950s.
Fake brouhaha: In Washington, liberals protest Trump’s plan to probe citizenshi­p on the Census, which the US did as recently as the 1950s.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States