Daily Press

Justices wary of quick ruling on Trump team’s census plan

- By Mark Sherman

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court sounded skeptical Monday that President Donald Trump could categorica­lly exclude people living in the country illegally from the population count used to allot seats among the states in the House of Representa­tives.

But it also appeared possible that the justices could avoid a final ruling on the issue until they know how broadly the Trump administra­tion acts in its final days in office and whether the division of House seats is affected.

No president has tried to do what Trump outlined in a memo in July — remove millions of noncitizen­s from the once-a-decade head count of the U.S. population that determines how many seats each state gets in the House of Representa­tives, as well as the allocation of some federal funding.

The court, meeting by telephone because of the coronaviru­s pandemic, heard arguments in its second case in two years related to the 2020 census and immigrants.

The census already is facing novel questions over deadlines, data quality and politics, including whether the incoming Biden administra­tion would do anything to try to reverse decisions made under Trump.

One possibilit­y outlined by acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall, Trump’s top Supreme Court lawyer, is that Trump might try to leave out of the count people who are in immigratio­n detention or those who have been ordered to leave the country.

But under questionin­g from Justice Elena Kagan, Wall would not rule out larger categories of immigrants, including those who have protection from deportatio­n under the De

ferred Action for Childhood Arrivals programs.

“We can’t be certain at this point, and we don’t know what the president will decide to do with respect to that,” Wall said.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett was among several members of the court who said the administra­tion’s argument for broad discretion in deciding whom to exclude is troublesom­e because “a lot of the historical evidence and longstandi­ng practice really cuts against your position.”

The court decided to hear the case on a fast track, based on the administra­tion’s plea for a decision by early January, when Trump is required by law to transmit census numbers to Congress. The Census Bureau is supposed to send the data to Trump by Dec. 31.

But Wall told the court Monday, “We are not currently on pace to send the report to the president by the year-end statutory deadline.”

He said census officials told him they hope some data is available in January.

A delay of even three weeks would mean the Census Bureau would be turning in the numbers to a new president.

President-elect Joe Biden takes office Jan. 20.

Several conservati­ve justices suggested that the

better course for the court would be to avoid ruling immediatel­y on lawsuits filed by New York and other Democratic-led states as well as immigratio­n advocates because Trump’s intentions are speculativ­e at this point.

“Mr. Ho, if the additional informatio­n would be beneficial in a few weeks, wouldn’t it be beneficial to actually resolving this case? As the questionin­g seems to suggest, there’s some difficulty in assessing exactly what informatio­n will be available and what that informatio­n will be,“Justice Clarence Thomas said to Dale Ho, the American Civil Liberties Union lawyer representi­ng immigratio­n groups.

The court could simply sit on the case in front of it to see what happens, or dismiss it as premature.

The second option would allow Trump to move forward with his plan and lead inevitably to a new lawsuit.

Trump has a mixed record at the high court on immigratio­n. The justices upheld his ban on travel to the U.S. by residents of some largely Muslim countries. But the court shot down his attempt to end the DACA program and blocked his bid to add a citizenshi­p question to the census for the first time in 70 years.

 ?? CHIP SOMODEVILL­A/GETTY ?? The justices could avoid a final ruling until they know how broadly the administra­tion acts in its final days in office.
CHIP SOMODEVILL­A/GETTY The justices could avoid a final ruling until they know how broadly the administra­tion acts in its final days in office.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States