April, 22 2019, 12:00am EDT
Supreme Court to Hear Arguments on Partisan Census Citizenship Question Intended to Intimidate Immigrant Communities
Statement of Common Cause President Karen Hobert Flynn
WASHINGTON
Americans deserve a fair and accurate census that counts everyone in our nation as the U.S. Constitution dictates. The Supreme Court tomorrow will hear oral argument in a challenge to the blatantly partisan addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census form. Three federal courts have sided with the plaintiffs and said - no citizenship question. Even the Census Bureau's own research anticipates that the addition of the question will intimidate many residents of immigrant communities resulting in an undercount of more than 6.5 million residents, undermining the integrity and accuracy of the census.
The partisan intent of the citizenship question is clear and Commerce v. New York presents a new opportunity for the Supreme Court, with newly appointed Justice Brett Kavanaugh, to show that it is above partisanship. This case, coupled this term with Rucho v. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek, the challenges to North Carolina's and Maryland's outrageous partisan gerrymanders, will give the court ample opportunity to show that it truly not a partisan branch of government.
The question is clearly partisan in intent. It is the brainchild of hyper-partisan former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, the co-founder of the far-right Breitbart News. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross even went so far as to mislead Congress about the introduction of the citizenship question and his meetings with Bannon on the topic.
The citizenship question is a bald-faced attempt to racially rig the census, undercount communities of color, and undermine fair representation which our democracy relies upon. We trust the Supreme Court will act decisively to end this blatant abuse of power for partisan political gain. The eyes of the nation are upon the Justices.
To view this statement online, click here.
Common Cause is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization dedicated to upholding the core values of American democracy. We work to create open, honest, and accountable government that serves the public interest; promote equal rights, opportunity, and representation for all; and empower all people to make their voices heard in the political process.
(202) 833-1200LATEST NEWS
Memos From USAID Official Now on Leave Warn of Aid Cuts' Dire Humanitarian Impact
"This will no doubt result in preventable death, destabilization, and threats to national security on a massive scale," wrote Nicholas Enrich, an acting assistant administrator at USAID who was placed on leave.
Mar 03, 2025
An official at the U.S. Agency for International Development who authored multiple memos taking aim at the Trump administration's handling of U.S. humanitarian assistance, including alleging that it has failed to follow through on its commitment to allow "lifesaving" programs to continue, was placed on administrative leave Sunday.
On January 20, U.S. President Donald Trump issued a 90-day pause on most foreign aid activities in order to allow the administration to review the programs. Later, on January 28, Secretary of State Marco Rubio approved a waiver on the pause for lifesaving humanitarian assistance. Meanwhile, over the past few weeks, the administration has also carried out mass firings at USAID and cut thousands of the agency's contracts.
The author of the documents, Acting Assistant Administrator for Global Health Nicholas Enrich, wrote in a memo dated February 28 that "USAID's failure to implement lifesaving humanitarian assistance under the waiver is the result of political leadership at USAID, the Department of State, and [the Department of Government Efficiency], who have created and continue to create intentional and/or unintentional obstacles that have wholly prevented implementation."
According to The Washington Post, Enrich's statements contradict claims from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who has said that there is a system in place that successfully exempts lifesaving assistance from the aid freeze.
Enrich said that the actions thwarting implementation include refusing to pay for assistance activities that have been conducted, and restriction of access to USAID's payment systems, among others. "This will no doubt result in preventable death, destabilization, and threats to national security on a massive scale," he wrote.
In response to the February 28 memo, Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), told The Washington Post that "these new details confirm our worst fears: the illegal and systematic dismantling of USAID will cause real suffering and deaths that are entirely preventable."
Another memo described personnel cuts among the agency's global health workforce, according to The New York Times and other outlets. Per the Times, Enrich said he released the memos on Sunday afternoon, after he received an email letting him now he would be placed on administrative leave.
And in a third memo, which is dated March 4, Enrich wrote that "the temporary pause on foreign aid and delays in approving lifesaving humanitarian assistance for global health will lead to increased death and disability, accelerate global disease spread, contribute to destabilizing fragile regions, and heightened security risks."
Enrich offered specific estimates for the impact of the U.S. retrenchment on U.S. humanitarian assistance. If global health programs are permanently halted, then the world can expect a 39.1% increase in annual malaria deaths, a 28%-32% increase in estimated global incidence of tuberculosis, and an additional 200,000 cases of paralytic polio per year, he wrote.
Additionally, the absence of life-saving health services in the future would impact tens of millions of people around the world, in particular pregnant women, newborns, and children suffering from pneumonia and diarrhea.
Failing to help stem the spread of preventable disease would have an impact on the United States, wrote Enrich, who warned of strain on U.S. healthcare infrastructure because of imported infectious disease cases and global economic repercussions impacting U.S. trade and markets citing, for example, that disease like "malaria, HIV, and TB primarily strike working-age adults or their children, impairing productivity and economic output in Africa, Asia, and beyond."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Brain Drain': Study Shows Workers Fleeing States With Abortion Bans
"Workers are not willing to trade their health and autonomy for a paycheck," said one advocate.
Mar 03, 2025
Republican lawmakers across the United States are determined to force people who become pregnant to carry their pregnancies to term by passing abortion bans and "fetal personhood" laws, but a new report shows that in many states, they are choosing choosing restrictions on reproductive rights over their states' workforce.
"Workers are not willing to trade their health and autonomy for a paycheck," said Dr. Jamila K. Taylor, president and CEO of the Institute for Women's Policy Research (IWPR) as the group released a report Monday on "brain drain" in states with abortion bans.
The group analyzed a survey of 10,000 adults by Morning Consult and found that 1 in 5 respondents who are planning to have children in the next decade has moved to a new state due to abortion restrictions, or knows someone who has.
Among people with advanced degrees, 14% have moved out-of-state because of anti-abortion laws or know someone who has.
Nancy Northrup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR), which advised on the study, said the report showed that "reproductive healthcare is a personal issue and workplace imperative."
"For business leaders and policymakers, protecting reproductive rights isn't just the right thing to do—it's essential for talent and long-term economic stability," said Northrup.
The two groups said the study showed employees' demands for policymakers and workplaces in states that are hostile to abortion rights.
"Access to reproductive healthcare is a fundamental component of workplace equity, and businesses can no longer afford to ignore the impact of abortion restrictions on their workforce."
Fifty-seven percent of workers who plan to have children prioritize employers who offer reproductive healthcare benefits and 56% person think companies should actively engage with lawmakers to protect abortion rights.
In states with restrictive abortion laws, people broadly support family-friendly workplace policies, according to the report, including 83% of Mississippi residents who back paid sick leave; 56% of people in West Virginia who think employers should offer paid time off for fertility treatments; and 70% of people in Alabama who support paid leave for pregnancy-related healthcare.
"Access to reproductive healthcare is a fundamental component of workplace equity, and businesses can no longer afford to ignore the impact of abortion restrictions on their workforce," said Taylor. "Our report makes it clear that companies who fail to address these needs risk losing their competitive edge. To build a resilient workforce and thriving economy, it's up to corporate leaders and lawmakers to take decisive action and make reproductive health care a top priority."
Workers expect their employers to not only provide reproductive healthcare and family-friendly benefits, but also to "stand up for these rights at a policy level," the report reads.
"Companies can play a critical role in helping to shape more accessible state policies and creating an environment that respects and safeguards access to comprehensive reproductive healthcare," it continues.
The report suggests that with workers thinking of moving to new states to get away from anti-abortion laws, employers will likely be incentivized to help ensure their states safeguard "access to comprehensive reproductive healthcare."
"Most employees are deeply concerned about their ability to access healthcare services while building their families, and they expect their employers to take an active role in protecting them," reads the report. "Accepting that reality and then making decisions from there will enable companies to attract and retain talent and, by advocating to improve the reproductive landscape across the U.S., drive economic progress."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Lyft, Uber Drivers Banned From Tennessee Airport After Caravan for Pro-Worker Bill
"Uber, Lyft, and Metro Nashville Airport Authority are engaging in an inappropriate and malicious alliance to destroy dozens of livelihoods," said the Tennessee Drivers Union.
Mar 03, 2025
A Tennessee union announced Monday that 34 Uber and Lyft drivers received messages "informing them that they had been permanently banned" from working at Nashville's airport after joining scores of workers for a peaceful caravan there last month to support a state bill that would impact the companies.
The Tennessee Drivers Union (TDU) said in a statement that some participants, "including those in the passenger's seat not driving," were banned from providing rides at Nashville International Airport following the February 14 action, during which "participating Uber and Lyft drivers had their apps turned off."
In a message to one Uber driver obtained by Common Dreams, the company said that "Nashville International Airport (BNA) notified us that you conducted a pickup on the arrivals level of the terminal. Please note that all pickups must occur in the Uber-designated zone."
"Due to the nature of the incident, the airport is restricting certain driver-partners from accepting rides or dropping passengers off at BNA permanently, pursuant to the terms of Uber's agreement with the airport," Uber continued. "Your account appeared on the list. For that reason, your account has been permanently blocked from operating at BNA. Contact the airport for more information."
A message to a Lyft driver similarly said that "it has been reported that you were conduct detrimental to the orderly operation of the airport. That being said, at the request of the airport, you are prohibited from operating on BNA airport property indefinitely."
"To prevent future suspensions, carefully review the BNA rules and regulations," Lyft added. "Please note, citations may be given if you operate on BNA property during your suspension, and you will be responsible for paying them."
Lyft and Uber have not responded to Common Dreams' requests for comment on the bans, which come as working people face high costs and a billionaire-led assault on the federal government.
TDU said Monday that "Uber, Lyft, and Metro Nashville Airport Authority are engaging in an inappropriate and malicious alliance to destroy dozens of livelihoods. The airport is one of the only opportunities for ride-share drivers to make barely above minimum wage."
"This is an attack against dozens of workers, their families, and their communities," the union continued, noting the millions of dollars in fees the airport gets from drivers and Metro Nashville Airport Authority CEO Doug Kreulen's $600,000 salary.
As Common Dreamsreported last year, TDU has sounded the alarm about working conditions for drivers at BNA. Union members kicked off Labor Day weekend in 2024 with a strike to draw attention to demands including a cap on the number of ride-share drivers in the area, an expansion of their airport lot, and clean, working bathrooms on-site.
TDU said Monday that "this retaliation isn't a mistake," arguing that "Uber and Lyft are threatened" by Tennessee House Bill 879/Senate Bill 818, introduced last month by state Rep. Rush Bricken (R-47) and Sen. Joey Hensley (R-28).
The bill text begins by highlighting that "Tennessee is the only state in the Southeast that allows out-of-state ride-hail drivers to operate within the state, while Tennessee ride-hail drivers may not work in surrounding states."
"Tennesseans who live and work in our communities, contributing directly to our local economy, struggle to compete with an oversaturated market of out-of-state drivers," the legislation explains, calling for "a basic licensing regime."
The bill would require ride-hail drivers operating in the state to have a "transportation network license," which would require a Tennessee driver's license, or proof of residency in DeSoto County, Mississippi, or Crittenden County, Arkansas.
Companies that allow drivers to provide rides without a Tennessee-issued transportation network license would be hit with a $1,000 penalty per violation and could ultimately be banned from operating in the state.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular