Listen to the article
Immigrant rights organizations have moved to dismiss a Republican lawsuit that aims to prevent the U.S. Census Bureau from counting undocumented immigrants during the 2030 census, arguing the legal challenge would undermine constitutional principles and impose massive costs on taxpayers.
Filed last month by Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway, the lawsuit seeks to exclude people living in the United States illegally from the census count. The immigrant advocacy groups, represented by several chapters of the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, claim such action would violate federal law and require a costly recalculation of the 2020 population figures.
“That unlawful request would distort representation for millions of Americans and shake the foundations of our representative democracy,” the groups stated in their motion to intervene in the case.
The legal battle represents the latest in a series of Republican efforts to remove undocumented immigrants or other non-citizens from census calculations. Census figures play a critical role in American governance, determining both the allocation of federal funding to states and the distribution of congressional seats and Electoral College votes through the apportionment process.
The Missouri lawsuit specifically requests that the apportionment process based on the 2020 census be recalculated without counting undocumented immigrants, and that the same methodology be applied following the 2030 census.
Similar legal challenges are already in motion elsewhere. A parallel lawsuit filed by four other Republican state attorneys general is pending in federal court in Louisiana, while Republican lawmakers have introduced legislation in Congress with comparable aims.
Census experts note that excluding undocumented immigrants could significantly shift political power in the United States. A Republican redistricting expert previously wrote that using only the citizen voting-age population, rather than total population figures, for redistricting purposes would likely benefit Republican candidates and non-Hispanic white voters.
The Constitution’s 14th Amendment explicitly states that “the whole number of persons in each state” should be counted for apportionment purposes. Historically, the Census Bureau has interpreted this language to include all residents regardless of their immigration status.
The timing of this legal challenge coincides with broader political pressures. Reports indicate that former President Donald Trump has been urging Republican-controlled state legislatures to redraw congressional districts in ways that would advantage Republican candidates ahead of the upcoming elections. Last August, Trump directed the Commerce Department to initiate work on a new census that would exclude undocumented immigrants.
Immigrant advocacy groups have recently achieved success in similar census-related legal battles. A three-judge panel in Tampa recently dismissed a challenge brought by Republican organizations against the Census Bureau’s statistical methods used during the 2020 count.
During a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on Tuesday, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick addressed questions about citizenship in the census process. While acknowledging that citizenship status is not a factor in apportionment under the Constitution, Lutnick stated that decisions about specific questions for the 2030 census form have not yet been finalized.
“What the questionnaire is, I don’t know, and we’ve not decided,” Lutnick told lawmakers.
The outcome of this legal challenge could have far-reaching implications for political representation and federal resource allocation across the United States. Census counts determine not only congressional apportionment but also the distribution of approximately $1.5 trillion in federal funding annually, affecting everything from infrastructure projects to education and healthcare programs in communities nationwide.
Legal experts suggest the case will likely center on the interpretation of constitutional language and the historical precedent of counting all residents regardless of immigration status, a practice that dates back to the founding of the republic.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
8 Comments
The census is meant to count all residents, not just citizens. Excluding undocumented immigrants could have significant impacts on federal funding and political representation. I’m skeptical of efforts to manipulate the census for political gain.
I agree, the census should strive to be as comprehensive and accurate as possible. Politicizing the process raises concerns about fairness and integrity.
The census is meant to be an impartial count of the entire population, not a tool for political gain. Excluding non-citizens could distort the data and undermine the principles of representative democracy. I hope the courts see this lawsuit for what it is – an attempt to skew the system.
This is a complex issue with valid arguments on both sides. Excluding non-citizens from the census could distort representation, but including them raises other concerns. I’m curious to see how the courts rule on the legal merits of this case.
You make a fair point. It will be interesting to follow the legal proceedings and see how the courts balance the various interests at play.
Counting all residents, regardless of immigration status, is crucial for fair and accurate census data. Excluding certain groups could have far-reaching consequences for federal funding and political representation. I’m concerned this is a partisan effort to manipulate the system.
I share your concern. Maintaining the integrity of the census should be a non-partisan priority to ensure equal representation for all communities.
This lawsuit seems like an attempt to undermine the democratic principles of the census. Excluding non-citizens could severely skew the population data and lead to unequal representation. I hope the courts uphold the constitutional mandate to count all residents.