Today's Paper Latest Coronavirus Cooking Families Core values App Listen Story ideas iPad Weather Newsletters Obits Puzzles Archive

— In a surprising move, the Supreme Court on Thursday kept the Trump administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census for now, and the question's opponents say there's no time to revisit the issue before next week's scheduled start to the printing of census forms.

But President Donald Trump said on Twitter after the decision that he's asked lawyers if they can "delay the Census, no matter how long" until the "United States Supreme Court is given additional information from which it can make a final and decisive decision" on the issue. Under federal law the census must begin on April 1, 2020. A former director of the Census Bureau said he believed Congress would have to change the law for the count to be delayed.

The issue of whether to add the citizenship question to the census is a politically charged one. Democratic cities and states who oppose adding it argue that they'd get less federal money and fewer representatives in Congress if the question is asked because it would discourage the participation of minorities, primarily Hispanics, who tend to support Democrats.

During arguments in the case at the Supreme Court in April it seemed as though the Trump administration would win because Chief Justice John Roberts and other conservatives appointed by Republican presidents did not appear to see anything wrong with Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross' decision to add the question. Ultimately, however, Roberts joined the court's four more liberal members in saying the administration's current justification for the question "seems to have been contrived."

The Trump administration had said the question was being added to aid in enforcement of the Voting Rights Act, which protects minority voters' access to the ballot box. But the Justice Department had never previously sought a citizenship question in the 54-year history of the landmark voting rights law.

"Altogether, the evidence tells a story that does not match the explanation the secretary gave for his decision," Roberts wrote.

Justice Clarence Thomas said in dissent that "the court's erroneous decision...unjustifiably interferes with the 2020 census." Trump's two appointees, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, joined Thomas' opinion. Justice Samuel Alito wrote separately in partial dissent.

What will happen next is unclear. The Census Bureau said in a brief statement only that the decision is "currently being reviewed." But The American Civil Liberties Union's Dale Ho, who argued against the citizenship question's addition at the Supreme Court said "there really, really is not time" for the administration to revisit adding the question.

The decision came on the last day the court was issuing opinions before a summer break. Also on Thursday the court issued a decision in a second politically charged case, dealing a huge blow to efforts to combat the drawing of electoral districts for partisan gain.

The Census Bureau's own experts predict that millions of Hispanics and immigrants would go uncounted if the census asked everyone if he or she is an American citizen. And immigrant advocacy organizations and Democratic-led states, cities and counties that challenged the question's addition argue the question would make people with noncitizens in their households less likely to fill out their census forms.

In his opinion, Roberts wrote that evidence showed that Ross "was determined to reinstate a citizenship question from the time he entered office." The Commerce Department oversees the Census Bureau.

Roberts added that there is "a significant mismatch between the decision the secretary made and the rationale he provided." The court sent the issue of adding the citizenship question back to administration officials.

It's not clear whether the Trump administration could try again to add the question, providing a fuller explanation of the reasons for doing so. Opponents said that can't be done quickly and that the problems identified by the court could be hard to overcome, but they didn't rule out that the administration might try.

Evidence uncovered since the Supreme Court heard arguments in the case supports claims that the citizenship question is part of a broader Republican effort to accrue political power at the expense of minorities, the challengers say.

The Constitution requires a census count every 10 years. A question about citizenship had once been common, but it has not been widely asked since 1950. At the moment, the question is part of a separate detailed annual sample of a small chunk of the population, the American Community Survey.


Sponsor Content

Archived Comments

  • GeneralMac
    June 27, 2019 at 5:01 p.m.

    POPMOM......... scratch..." to work hard" and replace with "ILLEGALLY "

    Fixed it for you.

    You're welcome .

  • NoUserName
    June 27, 2019 at 5:44 p.m.

    Not every hard-working Hispanic is illegal. As far as answering only a few census questions, somebody likely will knock on your door trying to get the answers deemed important that you failed to include.

  • UoABarefootPhdFICYMCA
    June 27, 2019 at 6:05 p.m.

    hispanic is a political label.
    no problem with political labels, just put a x in the box that notates you are a citizen.
    if you mark the other box well.. maybe we can make it incentive;
    "tell us you are not a citizen and when ICE comes they will bring a cheeseburger." (we could go as high as a free xbox for deportation...

  • UoABarefootPhdFICYMCA
    June 27, 2019 at 6:07 p.m.

    so. yeah the only person trying to make it racist is you.
    not our arguement that brown people are bad quid pro quo all our southern neighbors are bad.
    no thats never been the arguement no matter how long you anti-white people complain it is. its obvious who the anti-shemitess are.
    anti means TO REPLACE in the latin, not in opposition, as earlier dialect had that covered under ANA, to oppose/ anyway. anti shemites want to make it a race argument. lets not.

  • UoABarefootPhdFICYMCA
    June 27, 2019 at 6:09 p.m.

    not play "semantic" games. lets not.
    these are illegals. if your neighbors kid steals a candy bar i bet you want his nuts cut off and to be thrown in prison for life right or left.
    so yeah. you want to make us slaves to the world.
    because we are rich and privileged.
    come say that to my face. still aint seen you at walk-mart around here talking this "White people" privilege.
    betcha wont say it to somebodies face wit yo racist ass

  • UoABarefootPhdFICYMCA
    June 27, 2019 at 6:11 p.m.

    my get your teeth check, knockout game, ya heard of it? with yo richy rich guilty pimpin aint easy ass
    popmom wont be worried about her kids getting their teeth knocked out because of the racist shh she believe believe that. theyve enever even driven through a ghetto much less went to a school with one/
    yamulke mafia

  • UoABarefootPhdFICYMCA
    June 27, 2019 at 6:12 p.m.

    black face red face yella face, semantic hollywood and the sins your children are going to be executed for.
    reperations are still incoming.
    you can thank the bolsheviks.