Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE
CHECK OUT WeThePeople.store for best SWAG!
President Trump’s effort to remove illegal immigrants from the tallies of the 2020 census is being given a fresh look from the Supreme Court.
The high court announced Friday that it will review Trump’s petition after a New York-based federal court blocked his order to not count undocumented immigrants in the final census tally used to determine the number of U.S. House allotted to each state.
The Supreme Court’s decision to review the lower court decision came days after it granted a request from the Trump administration to shorten the Oct. 31 deadline and end the census, which required every 10 years by the Constitution.
A three-judge panel of the Southern District of New York ruled last month that Trump’s order barring the inclusion of illegal immigrants in the tally to determine congressional seats was an “unlawful exercise of authority” by the president.
BREAKING: Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Trump administration case regarding whether undocumented persons may be excluded from the census count for congressional apportionment. Argument will be on November 20th. pic.twitter.com/spuHntB2SG
— Steven Mazie (@stevenmazie) October 16, 2020
Trump had issued a memorandum in July stating that the “discretion delegated to the executive branch to determine who qualifies as an ‘inhabitant’ includes authority to exclude from the apportionment base aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status.”
“States adopting policies that encourage illegal aliens to enter this country and that hobble Federal efforts to enforce the immigration laws passed by the Congress should not be rewarded with greater representation in the House of Representatives,” Trump noted in the memorandum.
“Current estimates suggest that one State is home to more than 2.2 million illegal aliens, constituting more than 6 percent of the State’s entire population. Including these illegal aliens in the population of the State for the purpose of apportionment could result in the allocation of two or three more congressional seats than would otherwise be allocated,” he explained.
Trump asked that the Census Bureau provide him with two sets of figures, one indicating the full tally of everyone counted and another excluding those in the country illegally. The second, smaller, figure would then be reported for reapportionment uses in Congress.
This would potentially affect the number of seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and federal funding, particularly for states with a higher immigrant population.
These states would lose House seats under Trump Census order https://t.co/qsFvfpJ3Bc pic.twitter.com/4iteRGPqZm
— Conservative News (@BIZPACReview) July 27, 2020
Lawsuits by advocacy groups and a group of 20 states, cities and local governments challenged Trump’s plan as lawsuits sprang up around the country. The three-judge court in New York, including U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Wesley, Circuit Judge Peter Hall and District Judge Jesse Furman, blocked the administration from receiving any information on the number of illegal immigrants in the report to the president from U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross.
“Because the President exceeded the authority granted to him by Congress by statute, we need not, and do not, reach the overlapping, albeit distinct, question of whether the Presidential Memorandum constitutes a violation of the Constitution itself,” the panel wrote in its opinion.
The Census Bureau had noted in its rules for the survey this year that the “resident population counts include all people (citizens and noncitizens) who are living in the United States at the time of the census.”
The Supreme Court’s decision to review Trump’s appeal on the lower court ruling came after the week’s confirmation hearings on the president’s nominee Amy Coney Barrett. The judge, nominated by Trump to fill the seat vacated by the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, may be able to participate in the high court’s review of the census case.
The Supreme Court has set a Nov. 30 date for arguments in the case.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
[email protected]
Originally from New York, Powers graduated from New York University and eventually made her way to sunny South Florida where she has been writing for the BizPacReview team since 2015.
- Biden admin accused of pulling ‘nuclear level attack’ on women’s rights with ‘grotesque’ Title IX changes - April 19, 2024
- INSIDER: Liz Warren mercilessly mocked for bravely taking on the issue of ‘green texts’ while Rome burns - April 19, 2024
- CNN analyst throws cold water on Jim Acosta’s fantasy of Trump in a holding cell - April 19, 2024
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
BPR INSIDER COMMENTS
Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!
