Trump Decides to Omit Specific Immigrants from the Census Count
The U.S. President Donald Trump has proposed a new plan to exclude migrants without regular residence status from future U.S. censuses, sparking significant controversy and legal challenges.
Trump's proposal, announced on his platform Truth Social, aims to realign the distribution of state funds with the actual need on the ground. However, the legal framework for this change is disputed, as the President did not provide details on the concrete implementation or a possible timeline.
The U.S. Constitution, specifically the 14th Amendment, mandates that congressional apportionment be based on the "whole number of persons in each state," not just citizens or legal residents. Traditionally, the census has counted all residents regardless of immigration status for over two centuries. Excluding undocumented immigrants would break from this established practice and could lead to lawsuits asserting that the exclusion violates constitutional requirements.
The potential consequences of this proposed change are far-reaching. States with large undocumented populations—many of which lean Democratic, such as California, New York, and New Jersey—could lose congressional representation and Electoral College votes to states with fewer undocumented residents or Republican control like Texas and Florida. For example, Texas, with an estimated 1.7 million undocumented immigrants, could experience a reduction in political clout.
Furthermore, federal funding allocations that rely on census data could be affected, impacting public services and programs in states with high undocumented populations. The administration's plan to rely on "modern day facts and figures" and data from the 2024 Presidential Election to conduct a mid-decade census raises questions about the accuracy and reliability of this approach. Experts warn that administrative records from various federal agencies may be incomplete or inaccurate, potentially undercounting vulnerable populations and undermining the census's integrity.
The new census, if implemented, would be based on insights from the 2024 presidential election. However, it is unclear whether a president can change the rules for counting on their own. The current law does not differentiate between U.S. citizens and non-citizens for census purposes. The results of the census, which determine the distribution of federal funds to states, cities, and communities, also serve as the basis for the proportional distribution of seats in the House of Representatives.
Trump's new push to change the census method comes at a time when Republicans are attempting to redraw district boundaries. The results of the census are used to draw congressional district boundaries, and the potential impact of Trump's proposed change on political influence and funding distribution in the U.S. is significant.
Trump's previous attempt to change the census method during his first term was unsuccessful due to legal hurdles. The legal implications of this new proposal are significant and contentious, likely triggering major constitutional and legal challenges. The proposal faces near-certain legal challenges and Supreme Court scrutiny, making its future uncertain.
Policy-and-legislation surrounding Trump's proposed change to exclude migrants without regular residence status from future U.S. censuses has sparked significant controversy and legal challenges, with the President's plan potentially violating constitutional requirements due to the 14th Amendment mandate for congressional apportionment based on the total number of persons in each state. Politics plays a crucial role in this issue, as states with large undocumented populations risk losing congressional representation and Electoral College votes, while states with fewer undocumented residents might gain political clout. This proposed change, if implemented, could also impact the distribution of federal funds and public services in states with high undocumented populations, and its constitutionality and the accuracy of the proposed methodology are subject to intense legal scrutiny.
