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

Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl Message: We Are All Americans

Bad Bunny performs onstage during the Apple Music Super Bowl LX Halftime Show at Levi's Stadium on February 08, 2026 in Santa Clara, California.

(Photo by Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images)

Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl Message: We Are All Americans

Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl performance was the joy we needed at this time, when immigrants, Latinos, and other U.S. citizens are under attack by ICE.

It was a beautiful celebration of culture and pride, complete with a real wedding, vendors selling “piraguas,” or shaved ice, and “plátanos” (plantains), and a dominoes game.

Keep ReadingShow less
A scenic landscape of ​Yosemite National Park

Yosemite National Park.

Getty Images, Kenny McCartney

Trump’s Playbook to Loot the American Commons

While Trump declares himself ruler of Venezuela, sells off their oil to his megadonors, and threatens Greenland ostensibly for resource extraction, it might be easy to miss his plot to pillage precious natural wonders here at home. But make no mistake–even America’s national parks are in peril.

National parks promote the environment, exercise, education, family bonding, and they transcend our differences—John Muir once said, "One touch of nature makes the whole world kin." Thanks to Teddy Roosevelt, who championed these treasures with the Antiquities Act, national parks are (supposed to be) federally protected areas. To the Trump administration, however, these federal protections are an inconvenient roadblock to liquidating and plundering our public lands. Now, they are draining resources and morale from the parks, which may be a deliberate effort to degrade America’s best idea.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Republicans May Steal the 2026 and 2028 Elections
More than 95% of all voters in the United States use paper ballots in elections.
Adobe Stock

How Republicans May Steal the 2026 and 2028 Elections

“In four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good, you're not gonna have to vote.” - Donald Trump, July 26, 2024

“I should have” seized election boxes in 2020. - Donald Trump, Jan. 5, 2025

Keep ReadingShow less
Why Global Investors Are Abandoning the Dollar
1 U.S.A dollar banknotes
Photo by Alexander Grey on Unsplash

Why Global Investors Are Abandoning the Dollar

In the middle of the twentieth century, the American architect of the postwar order, Dean Acheson, famously observed that Great Britain had lost an empire but had not yet found a role. The United States is not facing a comparable eclipse. It remains the world’s dominant military power and the central node of global finance. Yet a quieter, more incremental shift is underway - one that reflects not a sudden collapse, but a strategic recalibration. Global investors are not abandoning the dollar en masse; they are hedging against a growing perception that American stewardship of the international system has become fundamentally less predictable.

That unease has surfaced most visibly in the gold market. In the opening weeks of 2026, the yellow metal has performed less like a commodity and more like a verdict, surging past $5,500 an ounce. This month, we reached a milestone that would have been unthinkable a decade ago: for the first time in thirty years, global central bank gold reserves have overtaken combined holdings of U.S. Treasuries. According to World Gold Council data, central banks now hold nearly $4 trillion in gold, nudging past their $3.9 trillion stake in American debt.

Keep ReadingShow less