Loading...

Supreme Court Rules Challenge to Trump Census Plan is Premature

December 18, 2020 by Dan McCue
Supreme Court Rules Challenge to Trump Census Plan is Premature
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.” 

In The News

Health

Voting

Supreme Court

Dems See High Court Pick as Chance to Revive 2022 Prospects

Democrats stung by a series of election year failures to deliver legislative wins for their most loyal voters hope they will be... Read More

Democrats stung by a series of election year failures to deliver legislative wins for their most loyal voters hope they will be buoyed by the prospect of President Joe Biden naming the first Black woman to serve on the Supreme Court. Justice Stephen Breyer's pending retirement, confirmed by... Read More

January 26, 2022
by Dan McCue
Justice Stephen Breyer to Retire From Supreme Court

WASHINGTON — Justice Stephen Breyer, a pragmatic liberal who has served on the Supreme Court for nearly 28 years, is... Read More

WASHINGTON — Justice Stephen Breyer, a pragmatic liberal who has served on the Supreme Court for nearly 28 years, is expected to inform the White House today that he plans to step down at the end of this term. Pete Williams of NBC News was the... Read More

January 26, 2022
by Tom Ramstack
Supreme Court Affirmative Action Case Challenges College Admissions Policies

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear an affirmative action case that threatens to invalidate college admissions policies... Read More

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear an affirmative action case that threatens to invalidate college admissions policies intended to level the playing field for disadvantaged minorities. A group of Asian students say they were passed over by Harvard University and the University of... Read More

Abortion Opponents Eye Priorities as High Court Ruling Looms

In the nearly two months since a conservative majority of justices on the Supreme Court indicated openness to dramatic new restrictions... Read More

In the nearly two months since a conservative majority of justices on the Supreme Court indicated openness to dramatic new restrictions on abortion, money has poured into the political fundraising arm of the anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List. The organization secured $20 million in pledged financial... Read More

January 21, 2022
by Dan McCue
Justices Reject Request to Put Texas Abortion Case on Faster Track

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a request from Texas abortion clinics to immediately return pending litigation over... Read More

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a request from Texas abortion clinics to immediately return pending litigation over the state’s six-week abortion ban to a federal district court. The unsigned order, issued without comment, apparently divided the court on ideological lines as it came... Read More

January 20, 2022
by Dan McCue
Supreme Court Holds Trial Court Erred in Child Killing Case

WASHINGTON — A New York trial court violated a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment rights when it allowed, over his objection,... Read More

WASHINGTON — A New York trial court violated a criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment rights when it allowed, over his objection, for the reading of a plea transcript of an unavailable witness to be admitted and read aloud in the courtroom. The case before the court, Hemphill... Read More

News From The Well
Exit mobile version