Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
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

Newspapers folded over.

Nearly 40% of Maryland newspapers question whether they will be able to operate without more funding within the next two years.

Adobe Stock

MD Bill To Support Local News Appears Unlikely To Pass This Session

As Maryland’s legislative session winds down, a bill in the General Assembly intended to support local newspapers across the state appears unlikely to pass.

The Local Newspapers for Maryland Communities Act would have required the state government to spend 50% of their print and digital advertising budget on local outlets in the state. The bill does not favor any particular news outlets, rather stipulating that organizations must produce original local content and have at least one reporter in or around Maryland.

Keep ReadingShow less
A group of people joining their hands in solidarity.

Formerly incarcerated leaders are driving criminal justice reform, from Clean Slate laws to community healing—proving that lived experience is key to safer, stronger communities.

Getty Images, Adene Sanchez

Second Chance Month: What’s Possible When Formerly Incarcerated People Lead

As a formerly incarcerated person, Second Chance Month is personal. For generations, folks directly impacted by our criminal justice system have driven movements for reform in America. Our determination has pushed this country closer to its ideals of a free and fair democracy, even when its systems have failed us. From a ballot measure campaign in Florida that restored voting rights to nearly 1.4 million people with felony convictions to a national “Ban the Box” movement that encouraged employers to remove arrest history questions from job applications for fair employment practices, formerly incarcerated people have proven that we can make history. But far too often, people like me are excluded from conversations on public safety policies. All of us want to live in safe, just, and prosperous communities—but that’s only possible if we center the leadership of those most impacted by our criminal justice system, and advance policies that prioritize redemption over retribution.

My incarceration became a turning point in my life, forcing me to reimagine my purpose and the kind of man I wanted to become. Today, I lead a Community Healing Resource Center in Morgan Park, where I convene a men’s group for people affected by gun violence and trauma. My work is rooted in a truth I’ve lived, and it’s why leaders like me matter: when we are given the chance to lead, we don’t just rebuild our own lives—we strengthen entire neighborhoods.

Keep ReadingShow less
Someone sitting at a desk, writing with a pen on paper, with a calculator and papers by their side.

An in-depth analysis of the U.S. economy reveals how federal budget priorities—shifting toward defense spending and away from domestic programs—are quietly increasing financial pressure on middle-class families despite strong headline numbers.

Getty Images, Maskot

The Math Isn’t Working: More for War, Less for America’s Future

On paper, the economy’s numbers look robust. But for many Americans, the math isn’t working.

A family like Mike and Lisa Hernandez, a middle-class couple in suburban St. Louis, is doing everything right. He manages a warehouse. She works part-time as a dental assistant. They have employer-sponsored insurance, a new house, and two kids. They’re living the American dream.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Bruce Springsteen on stage, holding a microphone in one hand and a sign that reads, "No Kings," in the other hand.

Bruce Springsteen & The E Street Band perform during Land of Hope & Dreams American Tour at Target Center on March 31, 2026 in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Getty Images,

It’s All About Soul — And the Future of American Democracy

American democracy is experiencing an unparalleled stress test. The headlines churn, the rhetoric hardens, and the daily spectacle can make it feel as if the country is losing its footing. The deeper danger, many observers note, isn’t simply that a political figure says outrageous things — it’s that the public grows accustomed to them. When shock becomes routine, the unacceptable becomes normalized. And once that happens, the standards that define who we are as a nation begin to erode.

When we get used to being shocked, things that should be unacceptable start to seem normal. When that happens, the values that shape our nation begin to fade.

Keep ReadingShow less