Trump calls for new US census that excludes undocumented immigrants
In a post on Truth Social, Trump said the census would be 'based on modern day facts and figures' and use 'results and information gained from the Presidential Election of 2024'. He added that 'people who are in our country illegally will not be counted'.
The US census has historically counted all residents regardless of citizenship or immigration status, as required by the 14th amendment's 'whole number of persons' provision. Trump's directive contradicts this constitutional requirement despite there being no evidence of problems with the 2020 census.
The move would fulfil a longstanding rightwing talking point that undocumented immigrants should not influence congressional representation or electoral votes. Far-right figures have long claimed that states like California gain unfair political advantage by counting non-citizens. The political activist Charlie Kirk, for example, argued in 2020 that 'California gets an extra 9 electoral votes because of counting illegals.'
Census data determines congressional representation, electoral college apportionment and the distribution of federal funding for schools, hospitals and other essential services. States with large non-citizen populations – particularly California, Texas, Florida and New York – could see their political influence and federal resources sharply reduced under Trump's proposed changes.
Legal and immigration advocates have also long stressed that restricting the census to citizens could depress participation among legal immigrants, who are alreadyundercounted because they may be more reluctant to engage with government authorities.
The US Census Bureau's own reviews found the 2020 count was accurate, with a net error rate of just -0.24%, which they say is statistically indistinguishable from zero. The Government Accountability Office noted in a 2024 report that the 2020 census produced a statistically accurate count of the US population at the national level, with no significant net coverage error.
Republican lawmakers in both the House and Senate have pushed for citizenship-only counts on the census, with the most recent effort coming from Senator Bill Hagerty of Tennessee reintroducing legislation in late June, co-sponsored by 18 Senate Republicans. Named the Equal Representation Act, it would require only citizens to be counted for congressional and electoral purposes, while mandating citizenship questions on future censuses.
'It is unconscionable that illegal immigrants and non-citizens are counted toward congressional district apportionment and our electoral map for the presidency,' Hagerty said at the time.
Similar efforts in 2019 during Trump's first presidency were blocked by courts and later reversed by Biden in 2021. The supreme court ruled such attempts premature and legally uncertain.
Ironically, the census is actually set to widen in 2030 after the Biden administration approved adding 'Middle Eastern or North African' as a new racial category – the first major change since 1977.
The census directive is part of broader efforts targeting undocumented immigrants since Trump took office. The administration has set a goal of deporting 1 million immigrants annually and reportedly established daily arrest quotas of 1,200 to 1,500 individuals.
According to 2024 Department of Homeland Security estimates, approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants were living in the US as of 2022.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
8 minutes ago
- Reuters
US Supreme Court declines for now to block Mississippi social media age-check law
WASHINGTON, Aug 14 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Thursday to put on hold Mississippi law requiring that users of social media platforms verify their age and that minors have parental consent in a challenge by a trade group whose members include Meta's (META.O), opens new tab Facebook, Alphabet's (GOOGL.O), opens new tab YouTube and Snapchat (SNAP.N), opens new tab. The justices denied a request by NetChoice to block the law while the Washington-based tech industry trade association's legal challenge to the law, which it argues violates the U.S. Constitution's protections against government abridgement of free speech, plays out in lower courts. Justice Brett Kavanaugh in a statement about the court's order said the Mississippi law was likely unconstitutional, but that NetChoice had not met the high bar to block the measure at this early stage of the case. NetChoice had turned to the Supreme Court after the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals let the law take effect even though a judge found it likely runs afoul of the First Amendment. NetChoice sued in federal court in 2024 in a bid to invalidate the law, which was passed unanimously in the state legislature amid concern by lawmakers about the potential negative effects of social media use on the mental health of children. Its emergency request to the justices marked the first time the Supreme Court was asked to consider a social media age-verification law. The law requires that a social media platform obtain "express consent" from a parent or guardian of a minor before a child can open an account. It also states that regulated social media platforms must make "commercially reasonable" efforts to verify the age of users. Under the law, the state can pursue civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation as well as criminal penalties under Mississippi's deceptive trade practices law. U.S. District Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden in Gulfport, Mississippi, last year blocked Mississippi from enforcing the restrictions on some NetChoice members. Ozerden issued a second order in June pausing the rules against those members, including Meta and its Instagram and Facebook platforms, Snapchat and YouTube. The 5th Circuit on July 17 issued a one-sentence ruling, opens new tab that paused the judge's order, without explaining its reasoning. Courts in seven states have preliminarily or permanently blocked similar measures, according to NetChoice. Some technology companies are separately battling lawsuits brought by U.S. states, school districts and individual users alleging that social platforms have fueled mental health problems. The companies have denied wrongdoing. NetChoice said the social media platforms of its members already have adopted extensive policies to moderate content for minors and provide parental controls. In its request to the Supreme Court, the state told the justices that age-verification and parental consent requirements "are common ways for states to protect minors."
Finextra
9 minutes ago
- Finextra
Fintech CEOs call on Trump to block banks from imposing 'account access' fees
The CEOs of more than 80 firms in the open banking sphere have written to President Donald Trump calling on him to prevent banks from charging fees to access consumer data. 0 Last October, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) published the Personal Financial Data Rights final rule, giving Americans the right to instruct their banks to share their financial data with third party providers. But, under the new administration's leadership, in May the CFPB moved to have the rule rescinded in a decision that the Financial Technology Association (FTA) described as a "handout to Wall Street banks". Since then, it has emerged that JP Morgan is planning to impose fees on companies wanting to access its clients' bank account data and has gone so far as sending pricing sheets to data aggregators - the intermediaries that link banks and fintechs. In the letter to Trump, made public by the FTA, the open banking CEOS say: "Large banks are taking aggressive action to preserve their market position by imposing exorbitant new 'account access' fees that would prevent consumers from connecting their accounts to better financial products of their choice. "This access is critical to ensuring Americans have control of their own financial lives in a digital economy." The move would undermine consumer choice, "which you vigorously supported during your first Administration," says the letter, adding that if the large banks are successful, it will choke off access to the finances of consumers and businesses, effectively killing competition. The CEOs - from the likes of Brex, Chime, Klarna, Plaid and Sofi - also argue that such a move would cripple innovation in crypto, AI and digital wallets and payments. "We urge you to use the full power of your office and the broader Administration to prevent the largest institutions from raising new barriers to financial freedom," they write.
The Independent
9 minutes ago
- The Independent
Supreme Court allows enforcement of Mississippi social media age verification law
The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to block enforcement of a Mississippi law aimed at regulating the use of social media by children, an issue of growing national concern. The justices rejected an emergency appeal from a tech industry group that is challenging laws passed in Mississippi and other states that require social media users to verify their ages. NetChoice, which brought the lawsuit, argues the Mississippi law threatens privacy rights and unconstitutionally restricts the free expression of users of all ages.
