Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

A democracy designed for a diverse country faces its latest test

Opinion

Supreme Court census protest

The Supreme Court will hear a census case Monday.

Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Smith is the vice president for litigation and strategy at the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit focused on bolstering voting rights and curbing money's influence on politics.


President Trump's crusade to exclude undocumented immigrants from the census count is being put through one final test.

At a key inflection point that may offer a window into how the Supreme Court will evaluate politically charged cases after the arrival of its newest member, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the court will hear the census case on Monday. It's extremely late in the game, as federal law requires the latest population counts for the allocation of congressional seats to be finalized by the end of December.

Chief Justice John Roberts knows how our continued faith in the Supreme Court depends on a collective belief that the court remains above the fray, not just another forum for partisan dispute. This case will be a test of that faith, because the president's order excluding undocumented immigrants from the census was both glaringly illegal and undertaken solely for political benefit.

The chief justice already ruled against the president once in a census case, last year, when Trump tried to add a citizenship question to the census. This time around, the question is similar: Can the president unilaterally exclude undocumented immigrants from state population counts that will be used to apportion seats in the House of Representatives?

Starting with the first census in 1790, the counts used for this apportionment function have always included all residents of the United States — citizens and non-citizens, regardless of immigration status. That is what the plain language of the Constitution calls for. There is no reason to change course now.

In addition to congressional apportionment, the case could have a direct impact on the outcome of future presidential elections. Since a state's number of Electoral College votes are determined in part by its seats in the House, excluding undocumented immigrants could reduce the voting power of Latinx communities — and other communities of color — in selecting presidents.

The president, however, has politicized the census in an unprecedented attempt to further marginalize communities that have struggled for political representation in the past.

On July 21, Trump announced that, "for the purpose of the reapportionment" after the census," the administration will "exclude from the apportionment base aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status." To implement this policy, the president directed Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, whose department includes the Census Bureau, to produce a second set of population data, separate from the results of the 2020 census, that would exclude undocumented immigrants.

The move is not only illegal but also extremely harmful. By law, the census must draw from the total population to ensure that the federal government is responsive and accountable to all people. This is to ensure it reflects population shifts in our diversifying country. The 14th Amendment requires that "representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State."

In the decision that is on appeal in this case, a federal district court in New York noted that federal law prohibits the president from relying on a second set of data, separate from the census, to reapportion Congress. A federal district court in California agreed, ruling Trump's attempt to exclude undocumented immigrants from the apportionment base violated the 14th Amendment.

Trump's plan not only ignores the Constitution, it also threatens to undercut central principles of our democracy. Elected officials do not simply represent the interests of those who voted for them. They represent all people in their districts. This includes children, noncitizens and individuals denied the right to vote due to state law. If left unchecked, the outgoing president's plan will unlawfully alter the composition of government and bend it towards his will.

This is a major test for the Supreme Court. It will be scrutinized to see whether it will stop the president's move to freeze out Americans by telling them they don't count.

Read More

The Real Shutdown: Congress’s Surrender of Power
white concrete dome museum

The Real Shutdown: Congress’s Surrender of Power

Introduction: The Real Shutdown Inside Congress

Marjorie Taylor Greene has surprised many by questioning her party’s shutdown strategy, making her seem more pragmatic than GOP leaders. On this issue, she is right: the federal government is dark, and the clock is running down. Whether or not this becomes the longest shutdown in U.S. history, the damage is already done.

Earlier shutdowns—Clinton’s fight with Gingrich in 1995, Obama’s battle with House Republicans in 2013, Trump’s 2018 border wall standoff—were disruptive but contained. Agencies furloughed workers, parks closed, markets wobbled, and then the government reopened, usually with a compromise. What makes this shutdown different is what’s at stake: not just funding, but Congress’s very capacity to function as a coequal branch of government.

Keep ReadingShow less
Despite infighting, Democrats can still unite around one common goal

President Donald Trump is a unifying issue for Democrats and Republicans. Above, he speaks during a meeting with President of Argentina Javier Milei in the Cabinet Room at the White House on Oct. 14, 2025, in Washington, D.C.

(Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images/TNS)

Despite infighting, Democrats can still unite around one common goal

The only thing the parties can agree on is that Donald Trump is the central issue of our time.

Let’s start with a recent headline: “It’s 2025, and Democrats Are Still Running Against Trump.”

Keep ReadingShow less
‘Inhumane’: Immigration enforcement targets noncriminal immigrants from all walks of life

Madison Pestana hugs a pillow wrapped in one of her husband’s shirts. Juan Pestana was detained in May over an expired visa, despite having a pending green card application. He is one of many noncriminals who have been ensnared in the Trump administration’s plans for mass deportations.

(Photo by Lorenzo Gomez/News21)

‘Inhumane’: Immigration enforcement targets noncriminal immigrants from all walks of life

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — When Juan and Madison Pestana went on their first date in 2023, Juan vowed to always keep a bouquet of fresh flowers on the kitchen table. For nearly two years, he did exactly that.

Their love story was a whirlwind: She was an introverted medical student who grew up in Wendell, North Carolina, and he was a charismatic construction business owner from Caracas, Venezuela.

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