Nielsen Rejects Citizenship Question Before Supreme Court 04/23/2019

Nielsen Rejects Citizenship Question Before Supreme Court 04/23/2019

The justices will weigh cases from the Commerce Department, which administers the census, and opponents that include a coalition of Democratic-led states as well as House Democrats and immigrant rights groups led by the American Civil Liberties Union. This particular question has been on the census before but was removed in 1960.

OH appears likely to drop to 15 congressional seats, based on the 2020 census.

Conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices on Tuesday appeared sympathetic toward a bid by President Donald Trump's administration to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census, a plan opponents have called a Republican effort to deter immigrants from taking part in the population count.

The Court's divide followed the usual ideological lines.

The court has a 5-4 conservative majority and has backed Trump in other high-profile cases. Judges previously also ruled that asking whether people are citizens would violate the provision of the Constitution that calls for a count of the population, regardless of citizenship status, every 10 years. "I don't know how far back, but certainly it's quite common".

The last time the United States asked about citizenship during the census was in 1950.

The four left-leaning justices pressed the solicitor general for the Justice Department to explain the reasoning behind the citizenship question, noting experts at the Census Bureau have said the citizenship question could lead to an undercount of as many as 6.5 million, especially in urban areas.

At stake for the state are billions of dollars in federal funding that are tied to population figures determined by the census, according to a study by the George Washington University Institute for Public Policy.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman barred the government from including the citizenship question in January.

But justices on the conservative wing of the court, particularly Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., questioned whether Ross' decision met the legal test of arbitrary and capricious because those statistical models hadn't been created when Ross made the decision.

The census case comes in a pair of lawsuits by a group of states and localities led by NY state, and a coalition of immigrant rights groups challenging the legality of the question.

The federal government and 17 other states say it is needed to help enforce the Voting Rights Act.

An argument defending the use of total population made in an amicus brief asserted that there isn't now citizenship data provided by the Census that is accurate enough for redistricting.

He issued an outright ban on including the citizenship question in the 2020 count, saying Mr. Trump can't get "another bite at the apple".

A decision is due by the end of the court's term in June. "You say they shouldn't use the census, except for in later litigation when they have to use the census". Sotomayor asked. "Are you suggesting they don't have - whether it is rational or not - a legitimate fear?"

A dispute as to whether the citizenship question is constitutional did not feature prominently in Tuesday's argument.

"Anything that undermines the accuracy of the actual enumeration is immediately a problem", Letter said.

The other conservative justices also seemed to lean in favor of the administration.

Yet his administration has bungled things from the start, each of the lower court judges ruled.

During the full argument, justices on the liberal wing of the court repeatedly questioned the reason for Ross' decision, highlighting how the Commerce Department had asked the Justice Department for a justification.

Related Articles