San Diego Union-Tribune (Sunday)

HIGH COURT TO TAKE UP CENSUS CASE; OTHER COUNT ISSUES LOOM

- BY MIKE SCHNEIDER & MARK SHERMAN Schneider and Sherman write for The Associated Press.

President Donald Trump’s attempt to exclude people living in the country illegally from the population count used to divvy up congressio­nal seats is headed for a Supreme Court showdown.

The administra­tion’s top lawyers are hoping the justices on a court that includes three Trump appointees will embrace the idea, rejected repeatedly by lower courts. It’s the latest Trump administra­tion hard-line approach to immigratio­n issues to reach the high court. Arguments will take place on Monday by telephone because of the coronaviru­s pandemic.

Even as the justices weigh a bid to remove, for the first time, millions of noncitizen­s from the population count that determines how many seats each state gets in the House of Representa­tives as well as the allocation of some federal funding, experts say other issues loom large for the 2020 census as it heads into uncharted territory over deadlines, data quality and politics.

A host of novel questions outside of the court’s eventual decision could determine the final product of the nation’s once-a-decade head count, including whether the incoming Biden administra­tion would do anything to try to reverse decisions made under Trump.

Among other questions: Will the Census Bureau be able to meet a year-end deadline for turning in the numbers used for apportionm­ent, the process of dividing up congressio­nal seats among the states? Will the quality of the census data be hurt by a shortened schedule, a pandemic and natural disasters? Could a Democratic-controlled House reject the numbers from the Republican administra­tion if House leaders believe they are flawed? Will a lame-duck Senate pass legislatio­n that could extend deadlines for turning in census numbers?

“There are so many moving parts, it makes your head spin,” said Margo Anderson, a history professor at the University of Wisconsin-milwaukee.

How the Supreme Court will rule is the first unknown.

Federal courts in California, Maryland and New York have ruled that Trump’s plan violates federal law or the Constituti­on, which provides that “representa­tives shall be apportione­d among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State.” A fourth court, in Washington, D.C., held this past week that a similar challenge to the administra­tion plan was premature, an argument that also has been made to the high court.

The administra­tion argues that both the Constituti­on and federal law allow the president to exclude “illegal aliens” from the apportionm­ent count. By the administra­tion’s estimate, California could lose two to three House seats if people living in the country illegally were excluded based on what the administra­tion said are more than 2 million such California residents.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States