Abide by Constitution, accept census ruling
This editorial appeared in the Seattle Times.
The U.S. Constitution leaves no doubt: The once-per-decade census is about counting every person living within the United States, regardless of their citizenship status.
Still, it has taken a federal court order to halt the Trump administration’s divisive attempt to slip a citizenship question into the 2020 questionnaire. Commerce Department officials are now appealing the ruling, which came in response to a multistate lawsuit.
This is a battle the Trump administration should cede. In the current political environment, when the president has been open about his desire to deport those who are living in our country illegally, adding a question about citizenship status is too likely to suppress participation in the once-a-decade survey. That is an unacceptable risk. An accurate census count is vital to ensuring the proper allocation of an estimated $880 billion per year in federal funds, as well as driving local decisions about where to place roads and schools.
Accurate census data is needed to determine the boundaries of congressional districts, along with how many congressional representatives are allotted to each U.S. state. The Census Bureau’s own estimates indicate that including a citizenship question would decrease participation among noncitizen households by at least 5.8 percent. It would add an estimated $82.5 million in unnecessary costs as well.
In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman found that several states, many of them with large Democratic or immigrant populations, would likely lose congressional seats if the citizenship question were added.
Better sources of citizenship data exist to help the Department of Justice enforce the Voting Rights Act, one of the administration’s stated goals.
A poor quality census in 2020 is clearly not in the public interest, potentially falling short of the Constitution’s mandate for an “actual enumeration” of all people living in the United States. The Constitution clearly calls for apportioning House members based on “the whole number of persons in each State,” not the number of citizens.
The administration should drop this legal fight without delay. Continuing down this path would only serve to skew our nation’s congressional representation, while harming local and state government budgets.
The Day editorial board meets regularly with political, business and community leaders and convenes weekly to formulate editorial viewpoints. It is composed of President and Publisher Tim Dwyer, Editorial Page Editor Paul Choiniere, Managing Editor Tim Cotter, Staff Writer Julia Bergman and retired deputy managing editor Lisa McGinley. However, only the publisher and editorial page editor are responsible for developing the editorial opinions. The board operates independently from the Day newsroom.
Stories that may interest you
A police union does not support one of its own. The Independent Party shows independence. And a scientific journal makes a historic choice.
The Judiciary Committee hearings should serve as an opportunity for lawmakers and the public to consider what Barrett would bring to the court — not a political show of gotcha questions.