The Citizenship Question in the 2020 Census: A Closer Look at the SCOTUS Ruling and its Implications

President Trump's tweet regarding the exclusion of the citizenship question from the 2020 Census generated significant debate. In a recent ruling, the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) allowed the inclusion of the citizenship question, but only after further arguments. This decision has sparked discussions on immigration, legal procedures, and the practical implications for the census.

SCOTUS and the 2020 Census Decision

The ruling by Chief Justice John Roberts questioned the rationale for the administration's efforts, much like those challenging states and immigrant rights groups. The Supreme Court essentially punted, affirming and reversing parts of the lower court's decision, and remanding the case for further proceedings.

While the Court didn’t strike down the proposed question outright, the ruling centered on the administration’s justification for its inclusion. The reasoning behind the citizenship question was deemed a lie, primarily because the Commerce Department was arguing that the inclusion would help with compliance under the Voting Rights Act. Five Supreme Court justices found this claim to be uncredible.

The Broader Implications of the Citizenship Question

Historically, a citizenship question has been included on some form of census from 1820 to 2000. From 1950 to 2000, a fractional sample of the population was asked the question, and after 2000, it was moved to the American Community Survey using statistical sampling methods. This suggests that the inclusion of such a question on the actual census had long been deemed unnecessary by statistical science.

The Court’s ruling on the citizenship question is significant, as it emphasizes the need for accurate and practical reasons when making such decisions. The timeline constraints for the upcoming census mean that the question will not be included in the 2020 Census.

Trump’s Misinterpretation of the SCOTUS Ruling

President Trump's tweet about the Supreme Court's decision is a perfect example of his misinterpretation. The Supreme Court did not prohibit a question about citizenship per se, but the lack of a credible justification for it was a significant issue. The decision could have gone the other way if the rationale had been truthful.

Trump's personal animus against immigrants and his desire to boost his base over immigration contribute significantly to the political climate around the issue. This debate is not merely about immigration, but also about voter suppression and the broader implications for American democracy.

The Larger Context: The Immigrant and Open Border Debate

Other countries do not allow just anyone to enter and live there. For instance, traveling to Mexico with a valid visa required extensive questioning about one's background, purpose of travel, and stay details. This highlights the importance of knowing more about incoming residents and ensuring legal compliance.

While immigrants contribute positively to American society, the fear of undercounting certain groups is a valid concern. Immigrants, both documented and undocumented, might be less likely to respond due to fear of potential repercussions. This could impact not only the census but also the distribution of federal funds and congressional representation based on census data.

Conclusion

The ruling on the citizenship question in the 2020 Census reflects the complex and often contentious nature of immigration debates in the United States. The decision underscores the need for transparent and credible justifications for including such questions and highlights the intricate balance between legal procedures and practical implications.

As the next census approaches in 2029-2030, the debate will continue, but the current administration will have minimal influence over the results.