Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Supreme Court sounds receptive to a census citizenship query

Supreme Court sounds receptive to a census citizenship query
Drew Angerer/ Getty Photos

The Supreme Court appeared ready on Tuesday to permit a citizenship question on next year's census, which no one doubts will lead to a national population count that's inaccurate by several million.

The fight over the 2020 census questionnaire is enormously important to those wanting to bolster the federal government's functionality. That's not only because the outcome will affect the apportionment of congressional seats and the allocation of hundreds of billions of federal dollars for an entire decade, but also because it could alter the balance of federal power for even longer.

The frequent partisan divide on the court became increasingly clear during 80 minutes of oral argument.


All five of the justices nominated by Republican presidents, by virtue of their questioning and past writings, seemed likely to conclude President Trump has broad enough executive power to conduct the census as he sees fit, especially because Congress has not asserted its power to prevent the citizenship question with legislation.

The four justices picked by Democratic presidents seemed united against allowing the question in light of the certainty of a significant undercount.

The Census Bureau believes asking each census respondent to reveal citizenship status will lead to 6.5 million fewer responses, specifically in noncitizen and Hispanic households, because people will fear reprisal from a Trump administration preoccupied with cracking down on illegal immigration. That figure represents almost 2 percent of the national total, which the government estimates as 329 million people today.

Solicitor General Noel Francisco acknowledged the question would depress responses to the census, a constitutionally mandated "enumeration" of anyone living in the United States at the start of each decade — whether they're citizens, green card-holders or undocumented immigrants.

Francisco argued the question was worth the sacrifice to help the Justice Department better enforce protections under the Voting Rights Act — the underlining reason Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross last year ordered the addition of the question. Citizenship status along with other demographic inquiries were removed from census questionnaires in 1960 to boost response rates.

"It's always a trade-off between information and accuracy," Francisco said.

The liberal justices weren't swayed, focusing on the dangers of introducing a question that was guaranteed to produce a more inaccurate census.

"There's no doubt people will respond less," Justice Sonia Sotomayor said, citing the government's estimates.

Justice Elena Kagan said "I don't see any reason why" Ross decided to reject the advice of the Census Bureau, an arm of his department, which recommended choosing a number of other less expansive, more accurate methods of gathering citizenship data that wouldn't jeopardize response rates.

The conservative justices appeared deferential to Ross' authority, skeptical of the Census Bureau's undercount warnings and, at times, almost annoyed Congress hadn't intervened — as happened in 1976, when it prohibited the census from asking a mandatory question about each respondent's religious belief.

"There could be multiple reasons" why people don't complete a census, Justice Neil Gorsuch said, downplaying the bureau's concerns and echoed by Justice Samuel Alito.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, on the other hand, noted that the United Nations recommends that countries include citizenship status in their censuses and that such questions were standard until six decades ago.

Chief Justice John Roberts wondered why Congress hadn't taken action if the situation was so dire. Douglas Letter, representing the House of Representatives, which opposes asking the question, said lawmakers have no choice but to await the court's decision.

Read More

The Desert's Thirsty New Neighbor

A "for sale" sign in the area where the Austin, Texas-based group BorderPlex plans to build a $165 billion data center in Santa Teresa, New Mexico.

Photo by Alberto Silva Fernandez/Puente News Collaborative & High Country News

The Desert's Thirsty New Neighbor

Sunland Park, New Mexico, is not a notably online community. Retirees have settled in mobile homes around the small border town, just over the state line from El Paso. Some don’t own computers — they make their way to the air-conditioned public library when they need to look something up.

Soon, though, the local economy could center around the internet: County officials have approved up to $165 billion in industrial revenue bonds to help developers build a sprawling data center campus just down the road.

Keep ReadingShow less
Handmade crafts that look like little ghosts hanging at a store front.

As America faces division and unrest, this reflection asks whether we can bridge our political extremes before the cauldron of conflict boils over.

Getty Images, Yuliia Pavaliuk

Demons, Saints, Shutdowns: Halloween’s Reflection of a Nation on Edge

Double, double toil and trouble;

Fire, burn; and cauldron, bubble.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Former Republican presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Former Republican presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. listens during a campaign rally for Republican presidential nominee, former U.S. President Donald Trump at Desert Diamond Arena on August 23, 2024 in Glendale, Arizona.

Getty Images, Rebecca Noble

The Saturated Fat Fallacy: RFK Jr.’s Dietary Crusade Endangers Public Health

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s recent embrace of saturated fats as part of a national health strategy is consistent with much of Kennedy’s health policy, which is often short of clinical proven data and offers opinions to Americans that are potentially outright dangerous.

By promoting butter, red meat, and full-fat dairy without clear intake guidelines or scientific consensus, Kennedy is not just challenging dietary orthodoxy. He’s undermining the very institutions tasked with safeguarding public health.

Keep ReadingShow less
Who’s Hungry? When Accounting Rules Decide Who Eats
apples and bananas in brown cardboard box
Photo by Maria Lin Kim on Unsplash

Who’s Hungry? When Accounting Rules Decide Who Eats

With the government shutdown still in place, a fight over the future of food assistance is unfolding in Washington, D.C.

As part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025, Congress approved sweeping changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, affecting about 42 million Americans per month.

Keep ReadingShow less