SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Demonstrators rally at the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. on April 23, 2019 to protest a proposal to add a citizenship question in the 2020 census. (Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images)
Federal Court Blocks 'Nakedly Partisan' Trump Effort to Exclude Undocumented Immigrants From Census
"President Trump has tried and failed yet again to weaponize the census against immigrant communities."
Sep 11, 2020
A federal court on Thursday blocked President Donald Trump's effort to exclude undocumented immigrants from the 2020 census, delivering what the ACLU called a "victory" for immigrants' rights.
The ruling stems from legal challenges brought forth by a coalition of organizations led by the ACLU and cities and states led by New York Attorney General Letitia James.
At issue was Trump's July memorandum declaring: "For the purpose of the reapportionment of representatives following the 2020 census, it is the policy of the United States to exclude from the apportionment base aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status under the Immigration and Nationality Act."
The three-judge panel found the president's attempt unlawful, saying Trump did not act "in accordance with, and within the boundaries of, the authority that Congress has granted."
"The merits of the parties' dispute are not particularly close or complicated," the judges wrote, adding that the defendants have "neither text nor history on their side."
"The statutory command to use the 'whole number of persons in each state' as the apportionment base does not give the president discretion to exclude illegal aliens on the basis of their legal status, without regard for their residency," the ruling states.
The judges concluded that the memo represented "an ultra vires violation of Congress's delegation of its constitutional responsibility to count the whole number of persons in each state and to apportion members of the House of Representatives among the states according to their respective numbers."
Dale Ho, who argued the case and is director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, welcomed the ruling.
"This is a huge victory for voting rights and for immigrants' rights. President Trump has tried and failed yet again to weaponize the census against immigrant communities. The law is clear--every person counts in the census," Ho said in a statement.
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)--who led an amicus brief in the case warning that Trump's order "would be enormously damaging"--called the ruling "excellent news" and noted that the decision was "not a close call."
"The statute is clear," Schatz tweeted Thursday, "and the Trump administration has been nakedly partisan and dishonest about their administration of the census."
The ruling, which may now head to the U.S. Supreme Court, as NPR noted, comes just three weeks before the census count date ends.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A federal court on Thursday blocked President Donald Trump's effort to exclude undocumented immigrants from the 2020 census, delivering what the ACLU called a "victory" for immigrants' rights.
The ruling stems from legal challenges brought forth by a coalition of organizations led by the ACLU and cities and states led by New York Attorney General Letitia James.
At issue was Trump's July memorandum declaring: "For the purpose of the reapportionment of representatives following the 2020 census, it is the policy of the United States to exclude from the apportionment base aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status under the Immigration and Nationality Act."
The three-judge panel found the president's attempt unlawful, saying Trump did not act "in accordance with, and within the boundaries of, the authority that Congress has granted."
"The merits of the parties' dispute are not particularly close or complicated," the judges wrote, adding that the defendants have "neither text nor history on their side."
"The statutory command to use the 'whole number of persons in each state' as the apportionment base does not give the president discretion to exclude illegal aliens on the basis of their legal status, without regard for their residency," the ruling states.
The judges concluded that the memo represented "an ultra vires violation of Congress's delegation of its constitutional responsibility to count the whole number of persons in each state and to apportion members of the House of Representatives among the states according to their respective numbers."
Dale Ho, who argued the case and is director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, welcomed the ruling.
"This is a huge victory for voting rights and for immigrants' rights. President Trump has tried and failed yet again to weaponize the census against immigrant communities. The law is clear--every person counts in the census," Ho said in a statement.
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)--who led an amicus brief in the case warning that Trump's order "would be enormously damaging"--called the ruling "excellent news" and noted that the decision was "not a close call."
"The statute is clear," Schatz tweeted Thursday, "and the Trump administration has been nakedly partisan and dishonest about their administration of the census."
The ruling, which may now head to the U.S. Supreme Court, as NPR noted, comes just three weeks before the census count date ends.
From Your Site Articles
A federal court on Thursday blocked President Donald Trump's effort to exclude undocumented immigrants from the 2020 census, delivering what the ACLU called a "victory" for immigrants' rights.
The ruling stems from legal challenges brought forth by a coalition of organizations led by the ACLU and cities and states led by New York Attorney General Letitia James.
At issue was Trump's July memorandum declaring: "For the purpose of the reapportionment of representatives following the 2020 census, it is the policy of the United States to exclude from the apportionment base aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status under the Immigration and Nationality Act."
The three-judge panel found the president's attempt unlawful, saying Trump did not act "in accordance with, and within the boundaries of, the authority that Congress has granted."
"The merits of the parties' dispute are not particularly close or complicated," the judges wrote, adding that the defendants have "neither text nor history on their side."
"The statutory command to use the 'whole number of persons in each state' as the apportionment base does not give the president discretion to exclude illegal aliens on the basis of their legal status, without regard for their residency," the ruling states.
The judges concluded that the memo represented "an ultra vires violation of Congress's delegation of its constitutional responsibility to count the whole number of persons in each state and to apportion members of the House of Representatives among the states according to their respective numbers."
Dale Ho, who argued the case and is director of the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, welcomed the ruling.
"This is a huge victory for voting rights and for immigrants' rights. President Trump has tried and failed yet again to weaponize the census against immigrant communities. The law is clear--every person counts in the census," Ho said in a statement.
Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii)--who led an amicus brief in the case warning that Trump's order "would be enormously damaging"--called the ruling "excellent news" and noted that the decision was "not a close call."
"The statute is clear," Schatz tweeted Thursday, "and the Trump administration has been nakedly partisan and dishonest about their administration of the census."
The ruling, which may now head to the U.S. Supreme Court, as NPR noted, comes just three weeks before the census count date ends.
From Your Site Articles
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.