facebook linkedin twitter

Supreme Court Rules Challenge to Trump Census Plan is Premature

December 18, 2020 by Dan McCue
The U.S. Supreme Court building. (Photo by Dan McCue)

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a challenge to President Donald Trump’s plan to exclude people living in the country illegally from the population count as premature.

Trump’s insistence that illegal immigrants be excluded from the count could profoundly impact the number of seats individual states get in the House of Representatives in the next decade.

However, the unsigned opinion released by the court Friday morning is not a final ruling on the merits of the case, and at this point, it is unclear whether Trump will receive the final numbers from the Census Bureau before he leaves office on Jan. 20.

“At present this case is riddled with contingencies and speculation that impede judicial review,” the opinion states.

“Consistent with our determination that standing has not been shown and that the case is not ripe, we express no view on the merits of the constitutional and related statutory claims presented. We hold only that they are not suitable for adjudication at this time,” it continues.

The three liberal justices on the court dissented from the majority opinion, saying they believe the president’s effort to exclude people in the country from the population for divvying up House seats is unlawful.

“The plain meaning of the governing statutes, decades of historical practice, and uniform interpretations from all three branches of Government demonstrate that aliens without lawful status cannot be excluded from the decennial census solely on account of that status,” wrote Justice Stephen Breyer, joining Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor in dissent.

“The Government’s effort to remove them from the apportionment base is unlawful, and I believe this Court should say so. The Court disagrees,” he continued. “It argues that it is now uncertain just how fully the secretary will implement the presidential memorandum. In my view, that uncertainty does not warrant our waiting to decide the merits of the plaintiffs’ claim.”

No president has ever tried to remove millions of noncitizens from the once-a-decade head count of the U.S. population that determines how many seats each state gets in the House of Representatives, as well as the allocation of federal funding.

But the White House maintains the president does have the authority to exclude at least some people living in the country illegally, including perhaps people who are in immigration detention or those who have been ordered to leave the country. 

Trump had demanded that the Census Bureau turn its apportionment numbers over to him by December 21. But the agency recently acknowledged that the discovery of data irregularities has put that deadline in jeopardy. 

Among those responding almost immediately to the ruling was Connecticut Attorney General William Tong who said, “The Constitution requires the government to include all residents in the census. Immigrants are people, and they must be included. 

“The Court today didn’t disagree. It just held that it’s too early to strike down the president’s order — in part because nobody knows whether the outgoing Trump Administration is even capable of implementing its own discriminatory plan,” Tong said. “I am committed to working with the new administration wherever possible, and through the courts wherever necessary, to ensure that every person in this country is counted in the 2020 census.” 

A+
a-

Supreme Court

Justices' Abortion Remarks: Is it Time to Overturn Roe?

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court heard arguments in which it was asked to overturn a nationwide right to abortion that has... Read More

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court heard arguments in which it was asked to overturn a nationwide right to abortion that has existed for nearly 50 years. The fate of the court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion throughout the United States and its 1992 ruling in... Read More

December 1, 2021
by Tom Ramstack
Supreme Court Case Hints at Change In Federal Agency Regulation Decisions

WASHINGTON — Conservative judges on the Supreme Court suggested this week during arguments in a multibillion-dollar lawsuit over Medicare drug... Read More

WASHINGTON — Conservative judges on the Supreme Court suggested this week during arguments in a multibillion-dollar lawsuit over Medicare drug reimbursement that now might be the time to overturn a decades-old guiding principle of administrative law. The issue in American Hospital Association v. Becerra is a... Read More

Justices Signal They'll OK New Abortion Limits, May Toss Roe

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Wednesday signaled it would uphold Mississippi's 15-week ban on abortion and... Read More

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Wednesday signaled it would uphold Mississippi's 15-week ban on abortion and may go much further to overturn the nationwide right to abortion that has existed for nearly 50 years. The fate of the court’s historic 1973 Roe... Read More

Abortion Rights at Stake in Historic Supreme Court Arguments

WASHINGTON (AP) — Abortion rights are on the line at the Supreme Court in historic arguments over the landmark ruling nearly 50... Read More

WASHINGTON (AP) — Abortion rights are on the line at the Supreme Court in historic arguments over the landmark ruling nearly 50 years ago that declared a nationwide right to end a pregnancy. The justices on Wednesday will weigh whether to uphold a Mississippi law that bans abortion after 15... Read More

Supreme Court Set to Take Up All-or-Nothing Abortion Fight

WASHINGTON (AP) — Both sides are telling the Supreme Court there's no middle ground in Wednesday's showdown over abortion. The justices can... Read More

WASHINGTON (AP) — Both sides are telling the Supreme Court there's no middle ground in Wednesday's showdown over abortion. The justices can either reaffirm the constitutional right to an abortion or wipe it away altogether. Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that declared a nationwide right to abortion, is... Read More

November 24, 2021
by Tom Ramstack
Supreme Court Sides With Tennessee in Dispute Over Aquifer Water Rights

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that Tennessee and Mississippi must limit their use of water from... Read More

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that Tennessee and Mississippi must limit their use of water from an underground aquifer to give each other a chance at it. The ruling takes on added significance as global warming makes water rights a touchier subject... Read More

News From The Well
scroll top