U.S. Supreme Court Decides Not to Decide Illegal Immigrant Apportionment Case

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that the White House request to the Census Bureau to modify the population count to exclude undocumented immigrants was not ripe. The per curiam opinion explained that it was premature to resolve the issue of whether the order was constitutional since there were no apportionment numbers available at the time of the oral argument and there was no certainty how the Bureau would implement the memorandum. The wording of the memorandum ordering the Census Bureau to modify the population count gave considerable latitude to officials regarding how and to what extent it would…
Read More
Monthly Redistricting Update: November 2020

Monthly Redistricting Update: November 2020

The U.S. Census Bureau was the main focus for redistricting news in November and it did not disappoint. The Bureau casually and cryptically announced an unspecified delay in its post-processing of census data due to "processing anomalies;" a major development considering the outgoing Trump administration is relying on timely delivery of apportionment numbers. The Bureau's census data was also at the heart of oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court on Nov. 30. Read the updates below. News Census Bureau Director Says “Processing Anomalies” will Delay Census Data Release Schedule (Privacy) Invariants Set for 2020 Census Data Products Listen: Supreme…
Read More

Listen: Supreme Court Oral Argument in Trump Apportionment / Citizenship Case

On Monday the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Trump v. New York. This case challenged an executive memo directing the Census Bureau to report official congressional apportionment data so that it excludes the count of non-citizens. For an in-depth analysis of the arguments, read SCOTUSBlog.com's report. Most expert observers say the court seemed preoccupied with the "ripeness" of the issue, or in layman's parlance - whether or not the administration has done anything yet that could possibly violate a statute or the constitution. Listen to the audio below. https://youtu.be/ePChyVCpI6A
Read More

CA Federal Court Panel Invalidates Presidential Order to Exclude “Illegal Aliens” from Apportionment Count

On Thursday (Oct. 22) a three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San Jose Division) issued a final order and opinion invalidating the president's July memorandum that ordered census apportionment numbers exclude undocumented immigrants. A copy of the opinion is here. A federal district court in New York was the first to invalidate the July memorandum in September. That case has been scheduled for oral argument before the Supreme Court on November 30th. The San Jose court declared the presidential memorandum a "violation of the Apportionment and Enumeration Clauses of Article I, Section 2…
Read More

Supreme Court Schedules November Oral Argument in Undocumented Immigrant Apportionment Case

On Friday, the Supreme Court announced it would expedite an appeal by the Trump administration after a lower district court halted the administration’s plan to exclude people who are in the country illegally from the official apportionment count numbers used in allocating seats in the House of Representatives. Read a synopsis below. Oral arguments are scheduled for November 30, just one month before the statutory deadline for delivering the apportionment numbers to the president.It is not clear if the Census Bureau will be able to meet the December 31 deadline for delivering apportionment numbers, nor is it clear how it…
Read More

NY Federal Court Enjoins Presidential Order to Remove Illegal Immigrants from Apportionment Count

A federal court panel is the first to decide on whether the president's memorandum directing the U.S. Census Bureau to report the estimated number of “aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status” is unlawful. The memo's stated purpose is to subtract this estimate from the total population in each state - the number that is historically used to apportion congressional seats among the states. Read the opinion here. Officials Enjoined: The court enjoined all of the officials who were party to the lawsuit from reporting the estimate in the official apportionment report. The court did acknowledge, however, that…
Read More