Judge Orders Trump Administration To Remove 2020 Census Citizenship Question

Enlarge this image toggle caption Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Updated at 5:08 p.m. ET

A federal judge in New York has ruled against the Trump administration's decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ordered the administration to stop its plans to include the controversial question on forms for the upcoming national head count "without curing the legal defects" the judge identified in his 277-page opinion released on Tuesday.

The question asks, "Is this person a citizen of the United States?" Such a question has not been included among the census questions for all U.S. households since 1950, although it has been asked of a sample of households for past head counts and for the Census Bureau's American Community Survey.

Furman found that the decision by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to add the citizenship question to the 2020 census was "unlawful" because of "a veritable smorgasbord of classic, clear-cut" violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, including cherry-picking evidence to support his choice. Ross oversees the Census Bureau.

"To conclude otherwise and let Secretary Ross's decision stand would undermine the proposition — central to the rule of law — that ours is a 'government of laws, and not of men,' " Furman wrote, quoting one of the country's Founding Fathers, John Adams.

Ross, Furman added, "ignored and violated a clear statutory duty" to use existing government records about people's citizenship status as much as possible rather than using the census to ask a citizenship question. In another violation of the law, Ross "announced his decision in a manner that concealed its true basis rather than explaining it," Furman said.

Furman left open the possibility that Ross might be able to move forward with the question if he were to meet a series of specific requirements, including providing his "real rationale" that would support his decision to add the question.

The judge also ruled that the plaintiffs did not provide enough evidence to prove their claim that Ross' decision was intended to discriminate against Latinos, Asian-Americans, Arab-Americans and immigrant communities of color in general. Such a claim, Furman noted, would need to be backed up with testimony from Ross about his intent for the question.

The issue of questioning Ross, however, has been put on hold after the Supreme Court agreed to weigh in on a dispute over what evidence can be considered for the lawsuits. The justices are scheduled to hear oral arguments in February on that issue, as well as on whether Ross can be questioned under oath by the plaintiffs' attorneys about why he approved adding the question.

Furman's decision marks a significant milestone in a legal battle that began shortly after the Trump administration announced last year that the 2020 census would include a controversial question about U.S. citizenship status.

"Today's ruling is a win for New Yorkers and Americans across the country who believe in a fair and accurate count of the residents of our nation," said New York State Attorney General Letitia James, whose office represented some of the lead plaintiffs under the state's former attorney general, Barbara Underwood.

Dale Ho, one of the lead plaintiffs' attorneys at the ACLU, called Furman's opinion a "forceful rebuke" of the Trump administration's actions.

"These are not the acts and statements of government officials who are merely trying to cut through red tape," Ho said during a press call, referring to the way Ross pushed to get a citizenship question onto the census. "Instead, they are the acts and statements of officials with something to hide."

The Census Bureau's public information office referred NPR's request for comment to Commerce Department spokesperson Rebecca Glover, who deferred to the Justice Department for comment.

"We are disappointed and are still reviewing the ruling," said Kelly Laco, a Justice Department spokesperson, in a written statement. "Reinstating the citizenship question ultimately protects the right to vote and helps ensure free and fair elections for all Americans."

Furman has noted that he does not expect his order to be the final word on the question's fate. The district court ruling in New York is expected to be appealed to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and, ultimately, to the Supreme Court.

"If a higher court disagrees with this Court's ruling, the citizenship question may well end up on the questionnaire," Furman wrote in his opinion, adding that the administration should be allowed to prepare for that scenario.

He specified that the Trump administration can continue to "study" using the census to collect citizenship data and to test a citizenship question, as the bureau plans to do beginning in June.

In addition to the two lead cases before Furman at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the administration is fighting five more lawsuits across the country filed by dozens of states, cities and other groups that want the question removed. A second trial over the question began earlier this month in California, and another is scheduled to begin in Maryland on Jan. 22.

The administration has maintained that the citizenship question was added because the Justice Department wants to use the responses to better enforce Voting Rights Act provisions that protect racial and language minorities from being discriminated against.

The lawsuits' plaintiffs, however, have argued that the administration has been misleading the public. Ross, the plaintiffs insist, misused his authority over the census and, by adding the citizenship question, discriminated against immigrant communities of color. Research by the Census Bureau suggests asking about citizenship status in the current political climate will scare households with noncitizens from participating in the head count. That, in turn, could jeopardize the constitutionally mandated head count of every person living in the U.S.</s>A federal judge in New York has ruled against the Trump administration’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ordered the administration to stop its plans to include the controversial question on forms for the upcoming national head count “without curing the legal defects” the judge identified in his opinion released on Tuesday.

Furman’s decision marks a significant milestone in a legal battle that began shortly after the Trump administration announced last year that the 2020 census would include a controversial question about U.S. citizenship status. The added question was: “Is this person a citizen of the United States?” All U.S. households have not been asked such a question on the census since 1950.

Furman has noted that he does not expect his order to be the final word on the question’s fate. The district court ruling in New York is expected to be appealed to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and, ultimately, to the Supreme Court.

In addition to the two lead cases before Furman at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the administration is fighting five more lawsuits across the country filed by dozens of states, cities and other groups that want the question removed. A second trial over the question began earlier this month in California, and another is scheduled to begin in Maryland on Jan. 22.

The Supreme Court has already agreed to weigh in on a dispute over the evidence that can be considered for the lawsuits. The justices are scheduled to hear oral arguments in February on that issue, as well as on whether Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, who oversees the Census Bureau, can be questioned under oath by the plaintiffs’ attorneys about why he approved adding the question.

The administration has maintained that the citizenship question was added because the Justice Department wants to use the responses to better enforce Voting Rights Act provisions that protect racial and language minorities from being discriminated against.

The lawsuits’ plaintiffs, however, have argued that the administration has been misleading the public. Ross, the plaintiffs insist, misused his authority over the census and, by adding the citizenship question, discriminated against immigrant communities of color. Research by the Census Bureau suggests asking about citizenship status in the current political climate will scare households with noncitizens from participating in the head count. That, in turn, could jeopardize the constitutionally mandated head count of every person living in the U.S.</s>A federal judge in New York has barred the Trump administration from adding a question about citizenship to the 2020 census.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman said Tuesday that while such a question would be constitutional, U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross had added it arbitrarily and not followed proper procedure.

The ruling came in a case in which a dozen states or big cities and immigrants’ rights groups argued that adding the question might frighten immigrant households away from participating in the census.

RELATED: EDITORIAL: Citizenship question could put 2020 Census down for the count

The decision won’t be the final word on the matter.

A separate suit on the same issue, filed by the state of California, is underway in San Francisco.

The U.S. Supreme Court is also poised to address the issue in February.</s>The Trump Administration is expected to appeal the ruling.

On Tuesday, a federal judge struck down an attempt by the Trump administration to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. According to The Huffington Post, critics of the question say that it could result in fewer minorities and immigrants responding to the survey, fearing repercussions for their answers.

The ruling was made by US District Judge Jesse Furman from the Southern District of New York. The question has been viewed as highly controversial ever since it was first suggested by the administration. Many critics worried that the question could dramatically reduce the response rate, resulting in inaccurate numbers for the 2020 census.

The suit against the question was filed by a diverse group. 18 states, as well as the District of Columbia, immigrant rights groups, and several cities all pushed back against the move. They also asserted that adding the question to the census actually violated a federal statute that requires a period of input and evidence prior to making changes to policy.

Judge Furman apparently agreed, ruling that the proposal was ‘unlawful.’ Furman specifically criticized Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross for adding in the citizenship question, stating that, “the decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census — even if it did not violate the Constitution itself — was unlawful for a multitude of independent reasons and must be set aside.”

“Most blatantly, Secretary Ross ignored, and violated, a statute that requires him, in circumstances like those here, to collect data through the acquisition and use of ‘administrative records’ instead of through ‘direct inquiries’ on a survey such as the census,” Furman wrote.

The Justice Department had previously requested the citizenship question to be included. Officials stated that the question would help provide additional information on the voting age population, and would further help to enforce the Voting Rights Act.

While opponents of the question are celebrating this decision as a victory, the battle is far from over. The Supreme Court is poised to review the case. They will then determine whether evidence outside of the official record can be introduced into the case, including outside testimony. This hearing will take place some time in the next month.

But even as the Trump Administration makes plans to fight back against the ruling, opponents to the new question are saying that this victory is an important one in light of the upcoming 2020 census.

“This ruling is a forceful rebuke of the Trump administration’s attempt to weaponize the census for an attack on immigrant communities,” Dale Ho, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project and representative of some of the plaintiffs in the trial said in a statement. “The evidence at trial, including from the government’s own witness, exposed how adding a citizenship question would wreck the once-in-a-decade count of the nation’s population. The inevitable result would have been — and the administration’s clear intent was — to strip federal resources and political representation from those needing it most.”</s>WASHINGTON – A federal district judge Tuesday struck down the Trump administration’s plan to add a question on citizenship to the 2020 Census, ruling that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross lacked the authority to do so.

The much-awaited decision by federal district Judge Jesse Furman is likely to wind up at the Supreme Court, which next month is scheduled to consider a portion of the case – whether Ross can be required to give a deposition about the reasons for his decision. But Furman’s ruling temporarily makes that question moot.

Ross announced the addition of the citizenship question last March, but it has been tied up in court. The government has not asked about individuals' citizenship on the Census since 1950.

Opponents, including California, New York, the American Civil Liberties Union and immigration rights groups, contend fears of deportation among undocumented immigrants will cause them to be undercounted.</s>A federal judge in New York has ruled against the Trump administration's decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ordered the administration to stop its plans to include the controversial question on forms for the upcoming national head count "without curing the legal defects" the judge identified in his 277-page opinion released on Tuesday The question asks, "Is this person a citizen of the United States?" All U.S. households have not been asked such a question on the census since 1950, although it has been asked of a sample of households for past head counts and for the Census Bureau's American Community Survey."To conclude otherwise and let Secretary Ross's decision stand would undermine the proposition - central to the rule of law - that ours is a 'government of laws, and not of men,' " Furman wrote, quoting one of the country's Founding Fathers, John Adams.Furman left open the possibility that Ross might be able to move forward with the question if he were to meet a series of specific requirements, including providing his "real rationale" that would support his decision to add the question.The issue of questioning Ross, however, has been put on hold after the Supreme Court agreed to weigh in on a dispute over what evidence can be considered for the lawsuits. The justices are scheduled to hear oral arguments in February on that issue, as well as on whether Ross can be questioned under oath by the plaintiffs' attorneys about why he approved adding the question.Furman's decision marks a significant milestone in a legal battle that began shortly after the Trump administration announced last year that the 2020 census would include a controversial question about U.S. citizenship status "Today's ruling is a win for New Yorkers and Americans across the country who believe in a fair and accurate count of the residents of our nation," said New York State Attorney General Letitia James, whose office represented some of the lead plaintiffs under the state's former attorney general, Barbara Underwood.Dale Ho, one of the lead plaintiffs' attorneys at the ACLU, called Furman's opinion a "forceful rebuke" of the Trump administration's actions."These are not the acts and statements of government officials who are merely trying to cut through red tape," Ho said during a press call, referring to the way Ross pushed to get a citizenship question onto the census . "Instead, they are the acts and statements of officials with something to hide."The Census Bureau's public information office referred NPR's request for comment to Commerce Department spokesperson Rebecca Glover, who deferred to the Justice Department for comment."We are disappointed and are still reviewing the ruling," said Kelly Laco, a Justice Department spokesperson, in a written statement. "Reinstating the citizenship question ultimately protects the right to vote and helps ensure free and fair elections for all Americans.""If a higher court disagrees with this Court's ruling, the citizenship question may well end up on the questionnaire," Furman wrote in his opinion, adding that the administration should be allowed to prepare for that scenario.He specified that the Trump administration can continue to "study" using the census to collect citizenship data and to test a citizenship question, as the bureau plans to do beginning in June In addition to the two lead cases before Furman at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the administration is fighting five more lawsuits across the country filed by dozens of states, cities and other groups that want the question removed. A second trial over the question began earlier this month in California, and another is scheduled to begin in Maryland on Jan. 22.The lawsuits' plaintiffs, however, have argued that the administration has been misleading the public. Ross, the plaintiffs insist, misused his authority over the census and, by adding the citizenship question, discriminated against immigrant communities of color. Research by the Census Bureau suggests asking about citizenship status in the current political climate will scare households with noncitizens from participating in the head count. That, in turn, could jeopardize the constitutionally mandated head count of every person living in the U.S.</s>A federal judge in New York on Tuesday barred the Trump administration from adding a question about citizenship to the 2020 census.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled that while a question on citizenship would be constitutional, U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross had added it arbitrarily and did not follow proper procedure. The ruling comes after a three-week trial in November.

“Secretary Ross’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census — even if it did not violate the Constitution itself — was unlawful for a multitude of independent reasons and must be set aside,” he wrote.

Among other things, the judge said, Ross didn't follow a law requiring that he give Congress three years notice of any plan to add a question about citizenship to the census. The ruling came in a case in which a dozen states or big cities and immigrants' rights groups argued that the Commerce Department, which designs the census, had failed to properly analyze the effect the question would have on immigrant households.

DEMS DECRY 'CRAVEN ATTACK ON OUR DEMOCRACY,' OVER CITIZENSHIP QUESTION ON CENSUS

Other civil rights groups, like the American Civil Liberties Union, applauded the court’s decision.

“This ruling is a forceful rebuke of the Trump administration’s attempt to weaponize the census for an attack on immigrant communities,” director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, Dale Ho, said in a statement. “The inevitable result would have been – and the administration’s clear intent was – to strip federal resources and political representation from those needing it most.”

The Justice Department said it was "disappointed" by the ruling and is "still reviewing" it.

"Secretary Ross, the only person with legal authority over the census, reasonably decided to reinstate a citizenship question on the 2020 census in response to the Department of Justice's request for better citizenship data, to protect voters against racial discrimination," Justice Department spokeswoman Kelly Laco said in a statement. "Our government is legally entitled to include a citizenship question on the census and people in the United States have a legal obligation to answer. Reinstating the citizenship question ultimately protects the right to vote and helps ensure free and fair elections for all Americans."

The Commerce Department, last May, said in a statement that the citizenship question would be added to the 2020 census count in response to a request made by the Justice Department in December 2017. The statement said that Ross had “determined that reinstatement of a citizenship question on the 2020 decennial census questionnaire is necessary to provide complete and accurate census block level data.”

A separate suit on the same issue, filed by the state of California, is underway in San Francisco.

The U.S. Supreme Court is also slated to address the issue next month.

TRUMP SAYS 'DRONE FLYING AROUND' WILL NOT STOP NEW MIGRANT CARAVAN: 'ONLY A WALL'

The census count is required by the Constitution, and its results are used to determine federal spending, as well as the number of congressional seats allocated to each state for the next decade, as well as the number of electoral votes available from each state.

Republicans largely supported the additional census question as a logical step. Democrats said the inclusion of such a question amounts to an effort to intimidate immigrant communities and siphon money and electoral power away from them.

But last year, the Commerce Department said that almost every decennial census between 1820 and 1950 “asked a question about citizenship in some form.” The department also said the citizenship question would be “the same as the one that it asked on the yearly American Community Survey (ACS),” which is sent to a much smaller percentage of American homes that the actual census.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“The citizenship data provided to the [Department of Justice] will be more accurate with the question than without it,” Secretary Ross wrote in May. “Which is of greater importance than any adverse effect that may result from people violating their legal duty to respond.”

Fox News' Jake Gibson, Kathleen Foster and The Associated Press contributed to this report.</s>A federal judge in New York has barred the Trump administration from adding a question about citizenship to the 2020 census. U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled Tuesday U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross broke the law as he tried to put the question on the census. Ross says the move was not politically motivated. The Justice Department is reviewing the ruling, which came in a case in which several parties argue adding the question might discourage immigrant households from participating.

NEW YORK — A federal judge blocked the Trump administration Tuesday from asking about citizenship status on the 2020 census, the first major ruling in cases contending officials ramrodded the question through for Republican political purposes to intentionally undercount immigrants.

In a 277-page decision that won’t be the final word on the issue, Judge Jesse M. Furman ruled that while such a question would be constitutional, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross acted in an “arbitrary and capricious” manner and violated the law.

“He failed to consider several important aspects of the problem; alternately ignored, cherry-picked, or badly misconstrued the evidence in the record before him; acted irrationally both in light of that evidence and his own stated decisional criteria; and failed to justify significant departures from past policies and practices,” Furman wrote in a decision that squarely laid the blame on Ross.

Ross’ explanations for his decision were “unsupported by, or even counter to, the evidence before the agency,” the judge said.

Among other things, the judge said, Ross didn’t follow a law requiring Congress be given three years’ notice of plans to add a citizenship question to the census.

“We are disappointed and are still reviewing the ruling,” Justice Department spokeswoman Kelly Laco said in a statement. Ross has said the move was not politically motivated.

The ruling came in cases in which 18 states, the District of Columbia, 15 big cities or counties, and immigrants’ rights groups argued that the Commerce Department, which designs the census, failed to properly analyze the effect that the question would have on households with immigrants.

Furman, citing Census Bureau estimates, concluded the citizenship question would depress responses in households with noncitizens by at least 5.8 percent and likely more.

Thus, he said, several states would lose at least one congressional seat based on 2020 census data. Furman said Texas, Arizona, Florida and plaintiffs New York and Illinois face a substantial risk of a seat loss. He said Colorado will suffer a census undercount of at least 0.7 percent.

Adding the question would cause New York, New Jersey, California, Texas, Florida, Nevada, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Washington, Oregon, New Mexico and the District of Columbia to lose funding too, he said.

Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Rhode Island and Minnesota would also suffer, Furman added.

A trial on a separate suit on the same issue, filed by the state of California, is under way in San Francisco. The U.S. Supreme Court is poised to hear evidentiary-related legal issues surrounding the New York case on Feb. 19.

In the New York case, the plaintiffs accused the administration of President Donald Trump of adding the question to intentionally discourage immigrants from participating, potentially leading to a population undercount — and possibly fewer seats in Congress — in places that tend to vote Democratic.</s>NEW YORK (Reuters) - A federal judge on Tuesday rejected the Trump administration’s plan to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census questionnaire.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman in Manhattan said the 18 U.S. states, 15 cities and various civil rights groups that challenged Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’ addition of the question proved it was more likely than not that they would be harmed if it were added.

Furman also said Ross’s decision to add the question was “arbitrary and capricious” and violated federal law, despite a lack of proof that the commerce secretary was motivated by discriminatory intent.

The Commerce Department and the White House were not immediately available for comment.

Ross had proposed reinstating the citizenship question last March 26, ostensibly at the request of the U.S. Department of Justice to better police potential voter discrimination.

Critics, however, said the question was intended to frighten immigrants into not being counted, and disproportionately harm Democratic-leaning communities by costing them political representation and billions of dollars of federal aid.

The administration has said using more precise citizenship data is needed to enforce federal voting rights laws.

Trump, a Republican, has pursued policies to limit legal and illegal immigration.

Furman ruled after a nonjury trial that ended in November.</s>NEW YORK (Reuters) - A federal judge on Tuesday set aside U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’s decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census questionnaire.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman in Manhattan said 18 U.S. states, 15 cities and civil rights groups that opposed the question proved it was more likely than not that they would be harmed if it were added.

The judge also said Ross’s actions violated federal law, despite a lack of proof that he was motivated by discriminatory intent in proposing the question.

Ross proposed reinstating the citizenship question last March 26, ostensibly at the request of the U.S. Department of Justice to better police potential voter discrimination.

Critics, however, said the question was intended to frighten immigrants into not being counted.

They said this would cost their communities, including many that lean Democratic, political representation, as well as billions of dollars of federal aid.

The Commerce Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
U.S. District judge Jesse Furman issues a decision that invalidates the Trump administration's addition of a U.S. citizenship question to the 2020 census. This is the first ruling on this issue. There are four more lawsuits, filled by dozens of states, cities and other groups, yet to be heard.