Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Memorandum on Excluding Illegal Aliens From the Apportionment Base Following the 2020 Census
whitehouse.gov ^ | July 21, 2020

Posted on 07/21/2020 7:01:47 PM PDT by ransomnote

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF COMMERCE

SUBJECT:       Excluding Illegal Aliens From the Apportionment
Base Following the 2020 Census

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.  Background.  In order to apportion Representatives among the States, the Constitution requires the enumeration of the population of the United States every 10 years and grants the Congress the power and discretion to direct the manner in which this decennial census is conducted (U.S. Const. art. I, sec. 2, cl. 3).  The Congress has charged the Secretary of Commerce (the Secretary) with directing the conduct of the decennial census in such form and content as the Secretary may determine (13 U.S.C. 141(a)).  By the direction of the Congress, the Secretary then transmits to the President the report of his tabulation of total population for the apportionment of Representatives in the Congress (13 U.S.C. 141(b)).  The President, by law, makes the final determination regarding the “whole number of persons in each State,” which determines the number of Representatives to be apportioned to each State, and transmits these determinations and accompanying census data to the Congress (2 U.S.C. 2a(a)).  The Congress has provided that it is “the President’s personal transmittal of the report to Congress” that “settles the apportionment” of Representatives among the States, and the President’s discretion to settle the apportionment is more than “ceremonial or ministerial” and is essential “to the integrity of the process” (Franklin v. Massachusetts, 505 U.S. 788, 799, and 800 (1992)).

The Constitution does not specifically define which persons must be included in the apportionment base.  Although the Constitution requires the “persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed,” to be enumerated in the census, that requirement has never been understood to include in the apportionment base every individual physically present within a State’s boundaries at the time of the census.  Instead, the term “persons in each State” has been interpreted to mean that only the “inhabitants” of each State should be included.  Determining which persons should be considered “inhabitants” for the purpose of apportionment requires the exercise of judgment.  For example, aliens who are only temporarily in the United States, such as for business or tourism, and certain foreign diplomatic personnel are “persons” who have been excluded from the apportionment base in past censuses.  Conversely, the Constitution also has never been understood to exclude every person who is not physically “in” a State at the time of the census.  For example, overseas Federal personnel have, at various times, been included in and excluded from the populations of the States in which they maintained their homes of record.  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.

In Executive Order 13880 of July 11, 2019 (Collecting Information About Citizenship Status in Connection With the Decennial Census), I instructed executive departments and agencies to share information with the Department of Commerce, to the extent permissible and consistent with law, to allow the Secretary to obtain accurate data on the number of citizens, non-citizens, and illegal aliens in the country.  As the Attorney General and I explained at the time that order was signed, data on illegal aliens could be relevant for the purpose of conducting the apportionment, and we intended to examine that issue.

Sec. 2Policy.  For the purpose of the reapportionment of Representatives following the 2020 census, it is the policy of the United States to exclude from the apportionment base aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), to the maximum extent feasible and consistent with the discretion delegated to the executive branch.  Excluding these illegal aliens from the apportionment base is more consonant with the principles of representative democracy underpinning our system of Government.  Affording congressional representation, and therefore formal political influence, to States on account of the presence within their borders of aliens who have not followed the steps to secure a lawful immigration status under our laws undermines those principles.  Many of these aliens entered the country illegally in the first place.  Increasing congressional representation based on the presence of aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status would also create perverse incentives encouraging violations of Federal law.  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.  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.

I have accordingly determined that respect for the law and protection of the integrity of the democratic process warrant the exclusion of illegal aliens from the apportionment base, to the extent feasible and to the maximum extent of the President’s discretion under the law.

Sec. 3Excluding Illegal Aliens from the Apportionment Base.  In preparing his report to the President under section 141(b) of title 13, United States Code, the Secretary shall take all appropriate action, consistent with the Constitution and other applicable law, to provide information permitting the President, to the extent practicable, to exercise the President’s discretion to carry out the policy set forth in section 2 of this memorandum.  The Secretary shall also include in that report information tabulated according to the methodology set forth in Final 2020 Census Residence Criteria and Residence Situations, 83 Fed. Reg. 5525 (Feb. 8, 2018).

Sec4.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

 
DONALD J. TRUMP


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: 2020census; illegalaliens; memorandum

1 posted on 07/21/2020 7:01:47 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

Federal Judge blocks it in 5, 4, 3,...


2 posted on 07/21/2020 7:03:07 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (You are in far greater danger from authoritarian government than you are from a seasonal virus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

All the Clinton/Obama Judges are napping right now ,LOL


3 posted on 07/21/2020 7:14:41 PM PDT by butlerweave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

Still working hours in Hawaii. They’ll shut it down...


4 posted on 07/21/2020 7:21:31 PM PDT by neodad (USS Vincennes (CG-49) Freedom's Fortress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Oh they are REALLY going to have a hard time overturning this.


5 posted on 07/21/2020 7:23:18 PM PDT by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

What does John Roberts think about this subject?

Not to be too flippant, but, I bet that the four liberals on the Supreme Court are in favor of counting illegal aliens in the census, and including them in the population base for Congressional apportionment.

So it could all come down to John Roberts if this case hits the Supreme Court.


6 posted on 07/21/2020 7:28:12 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: neodad

What a Hawaiian judge can do, a mightier judge can undo.
So far, every single ruling of that crazy Hawaiian judge has been overturned.
Quote from movie (The Fastest Gun Alive) : No matter how cast you are, there is always someone faster.


7 posted on 07/21/2020 7:36:41 PM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

when this is blocked, he should say that, for purpose of apportionment, since these are illegal aliens, and therefore not “residing” in a specific state, that they will be distributed evenly amongst all the states.


8 posted on 07/21/2020 7:38:58 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
"In Executive Order 13880 of July 11, 2019 (Collecting Information About Citizenship Status in Connection With the Decennial Census), I instructed executive departments and agencies to share information with the Department of Commerce, to the extent permissible and consistent with law, to allow the Secretary to obtain accurate data on the number of citizens, non-citizens, and illegal aliens in the country."

I wonder how successful that was.

9 posted on 07/21/2020 7:41:01 PM PDT by UnwashedPeasant (Trump is solving the world's problems only to distract us from Russia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Yep. It will go to the SC. Hopefully RGB will be gone by then. Can’t count on Roberts.


10 posted on 07/21/2020 8:05:34 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Where do you find the word "except" in the 2nd Amendment?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: butlerweave

They already know how they are going to “judge” the case.


11 posted on 07/21/2020 8:06:41 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Where do you find the word "except" in the 2nd Amendment?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

“What does John Roberts think about this subject?”

Right now his head is exploding.

He caused this.

He just tried to screw Trump with DACA decision: he said Trump had no right to reverse a policy statement of the Obama administration.

The jaw dropping insanity of that decision is only mitigated by the fact that Roberts said Trump could reverse it but ONLY after going through the tedious steps of going by the Administrative Procedures Act.

Which is insane, because Obama didn’t USE that to issue his policy. Holder did when he issued the rules.

So what the idiot Roberts just did was hand Trump a roadmap to implement his agenda: note that this is a MEMORANDUM, not an Executive Order. It will be implemented by the issuance of rules under the Commerce Department.

How would Roberts be able to reverse himself and declare this unlawful? He just said it was.

The moron just threw Brer Trump in the Briar Patch.

And he be likin’ it.

This is HUGE. It will rip 5-6 Congressional seats from Califnornia ALONE. Probably a few similar from Texas, but those are Rat districts anyway.

It could mean like a 10 or 12 seat loss in the House for the Rats. That’s how many illegals are here.

Nope. Beaming Simpleton Roberts didn’t realize that he’s playing with the Master Competitor. Who just jammed it right back up little Johnny’s ass.


12 posted on 07/21/2020 8:12:37 PM PDT by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

The devil is in the details - if it consists of literally excluding illegals from the census if they said they were illegal on the form, it gets upheld 9-0. If it’s something like “we estimate this 10% of people on the census were lying about their immigration status so we are going to shave 10% off blue states’ apportionment base”, that loses anywhere from between 5-4 with Roberts as the deciding vote or 9-0 but with a liberal plurality opinion, a Roberts-gorsuch-kavanaugh concurring opinion, and an alito-thomas concurring opinion.


13 posted on 07/21/2020 9:39:13 PM PDT by socalgop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

Sounds good to me. It will save the lives of those hired to go out and do the field work, too.


14 posted on 07/22/2020 12:27:03 AM PDT by Terry L Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson