Don’t fear a citizenship question
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra is protesting a proposal by the Trump administration to add a question about U.S. citizenship to the 2020 census. He fears this question will depress participation, which would harm the state if noncitizens fail to respond to the census. We can calm the fears of noncitizens by telling them the truth about the census: Noncitizens should respond to the 2020 census. It may help them in the future, and it cannot be used against them.
Federal officials will not be able to access individual census responses for 72 years. Nothing about the census question relates to undocumented immigrants. The question — Is this person a citizen of the United States? — only differentiates between citizens and noncitizens. There are millions of legal noncitizens living in California. We should not confuse noncitizen with illegal alien.
This question has been asked before and not a single undocumented immigrant was identified and arrested due to a census response. Unfortunately, the 1940 census was unethically used to identify Japanese Americans, but nobody was deported. Congress has changed the law, and Homeland Security issued directives, to protect anyone responding to the census. Undocumented immigrants are safe from being identified by the 2020 census until 2092.
When Becerra protests the citizenship question, the reason should relate to how this might affect the state population that determines representation in Congress. Will noncitizens not be counted for representational purposes? Please don’t use the argument that this question will lead to undocumented immigrants being identified and deported. It is not true and will cause an undercount if the citizenship question is placed on the census.
In the 1990s, welfare reform laws caused a problem for thousands of elderly women in nursing homes. They had immigrated before 1920, but there was no record of their legal entry. The U.S. Department of State did not issue immigrant visas until 1921. Those who entered before 1921 were inspected when a ship landed at an American port. No immigration file was created until years later, when these immigrants applied for naturalization. At that time, women were expected to stay at home, and not work. Why waste money on a woman’s naturalization application?
A provision in the immigration law allowed these women to gain legal residence and citizenship, on the same day, if they could prove they came before 1924. We found these women on the 1920 census and I personally went to the nursing homes and administered the oath of citizenship to many of them. We could do this because someone had responded to the 1920 census. The 1920 census records became public in 1992, so family members could easily find the names of these women and help them gain the U.S. citizenship needed to retain full federal benefits.
I neither advocate, nor oppose, putting the citizenship question on the census. However, if it is included, we should give people reasons to complete the census anyway. Cries of an undercount will be a self-fulfilling prophesy.
In the 1970s, as an immigration officer, I was able to get information from Social Security regarding foreign students who were working without permission. However, Congress enacted laws in the late 1970s that stopped federal agencies from sharing this type of information, except under special circumstances and when approved by officials in Washington, D.C. After the passage of privacy laws, immigration agents were not able to go to another federal agency and get information on undocumented immigrants , except with a great deal of work and justification.
There are provisions in the law today that permit undocumented immigrants to gain legal status if they can prove they have lived here for many years. Many cases have been approved when individuals accessed their personal census data. Federal agencies cannot access this information. We need to convince noncitizens that participating in the census can help them.