Trump v. New York

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Supreme Court of the United States
Trump v. New York
Term: 2020
Important Dates
Argument: November 30, 2020
Decided: December 18, 2020
Outcome
Vacated and remanded
Vote
6-3
Majority
Chief Justice John G. Roberts • Clarence Thomas • Samuel Alito • Neil Gorsuch • Brett Kavanaugh • Amy Coney Barrett
Dissenting
Stephen Breyer • Sonia Sotomayor • Elena Kagan


Trump v. New York is a case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on November 30, 2020, during the court's October 2020-2021 term. The case came on a writ of certiorari to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The case concerned congressional apportionment following the 2020 U.S. Census. The U.S. government asked the U.S. Supreme Court to consider if the president could order the U.S. secretary of commerce to exclude individuals residing unlawfully in the U.S. from the census' apportionment base.[1][2]

The court vacated the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York's decision in a 6-3 per curiam ruling, holding the coalition of state and local governments and NGOs did not have standing in this case. The court did not rule on the merits. Click here for more information about the ruling.

HIGHLIGHTS
  • The case: President Donald Trump (R) issued a memorandum to the U.S. secretary of commerce regarding congressional apportionment following the 2020 U.S. Census. The memorandum said it was the policy of the United States to exclude individuals living unlawfully in the U.S. from the census apportionment base. A coalition of state and local governments and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) sued the government in U.S. district court, arguing the policy violated the U.S. Constitution and laws governing the census and apportionment. The government argued (1) the court did not have jurisdiction to review the claims and (2) the policy was legal. The district court ruled in favor of the coalition, holding the president exceeded his authority in issuing the memorandum. The government appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.[2]
  • The issues: (1) Whether the coalition of state and local governments and NGOs have standing to challenge the memorandum and (2) whether the president has the authority to exclude individuals unlawfully residing in the U.S. from the apportionment base.[3]
  • The outcome: The court vacated the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York's decision in a 6-3 per curiam ruling, holding the coalition of state and local governments and NGOs did not have standing in this case. The court did not rule on the merits.


    • Click here to review the lower court's opinion.

    Timeline

    The following timeline details key events in this case:

    • December 18, 2020: The U.S. Supreme Court vacated the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York's decision and remanded the case.
    • November 30, 2020: The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument.
    • October 16, 2020: The U.S. Supreme Court accepted the case for expedited review.
    • September 22, 2020: President Donald Trump (R), the petitioner, filed a motion to expedite the case for review before the U.S. Supreme Court.
    • September 10, 2020: The Southern District of New York ruled against the U.S. government, holding the president exceeded his authority in issuing the memorandum.
    • July 21, 2020: President Trump issued a memorandum to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross directing Ross to exclude individuals residing unlawfully in the U.S. from the apportionment base.

    Background

    U.S. Census

    See also: United States census, 2020

    The census aims to provide a complete count of the U.S. population along with demographic data.[4] The 2020 census was conducted by the United States Census Bureau, a division of the U.S. Department of Commerce. Statistical information on the population collected through the census every 10 years is used for congressional apportionment and the distribution of federal funds, among other uses.[5]

    The U.S. Census Bureau was scheduled to deliver apportionment counts from the 2020 census to the president by December 31, 2020. The president was scheduled to report the apportionment results to Congress by January 10, 2021.[1]

    Memorandum

    On July 21, 2020, President Donald Trump (R) issued a memorandum to U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross regarding congressional apportionment following the 2020 U.S. Census. The memorandum outlined the following policy:

    “ To exclude from the apportionment base aliens who are not in a lawful immigration status under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, to the maximum extent feasible and consistent with the discretion delegated to the executive branch.[6] ”


    The memorandum also directed the secretary to provide information in a report that would allow the president to carry out the policy.[1] Click here to read the full memorandum.

    Challenge in the Southern District of New York

    A coalition of 22 states and the District of Columbia, 15 cities and counties, and the United States Conference of Mayors as well as a coalition of non-governmental organizations sued the government, arguing the policy violated the U.S. Constitution, laws governing the U.S. census and apportionment, and other laws. They alleged the policy would cause irreparable harm (1) through the loss of seats in the U.S. House if individuals residing unlawfully in the U.S. were excluded from the apportionment base and (2) by negatively impacting the census count, which was ongoing when the case was filed.[2]

    The defendants in the lower court—the president, the secretary of commerce and the U.S. Department of Commerce, and the U.S. Census Bureau and its director—argued (1) the Southern District of New York did not have jurisdiction to hear the coalitions' claims and (2) excluding individuals residing unlawfully in the U.S. from the census count was legal.[2]

    On September 10, 2020, a three-judge panel of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a per curiam opinion granting the coalitions' motion for summary judgment. The court held the president exceeded his authority in issuing the memorandum and enjoined—or prohibited—the secretary of commerce from including any information about individuals residing unlawfully in the U.S. in his report. Specifically, the court held, "The Presidential Memorandum deviates from, and thus violates, the statutory scheme. Second, the Presidential Memorandum violates the statute governing apportionment because, so long as they reside in the United States, illegal aliens qualify as 'persons in' a 'State' as Congress used those words." The district court did not consider the question of whether the memorandum violated the Constitution itself.[2]

    Click here to read the Southern District of New York's opinion.

    Appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court

    The U.S. government appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court for an expedited review, arguing the Southern District of New York's judgment "interferes with the Secretary’s ability to meet the December 31 statutory deadline while complying with the President’s expressed policy."[1] Click here for more information on statutory deadlines related to the U.S. Census.

    Questions presented

    The petitioner presented the following questions to the court:[3]

    Questions presented:
    “ 1. Whether the relief entered satisfies the requirements of Article III of the Constitution.


    2. Whether the Memorandum is a permissible exercise of the President’s discretion under the provisions of law governing congressional apportionment.[6]

    		”

    Outcome

    In a 6-3 per curiam opinion, the court vacated the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York's decision, holding the plaintiffs did not have standing in this case. The court did not rule on the merits.[7]

    Opinion

    The court issued a per curiam opinion, in which a decision is issued collectively by the court. The authorship is not indicated. Click here for more information.

    The opinion said:

    “ Consistent with our determination that standing has not been shown and that the case is not ripe, we express no view on the merits of the constitutional and related statutory claims presented. We hold only that they are not suitable for adjudication at this time.[6] ”

    Dissenting opinion

    Justice Stephen Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.[7]

    In his dissent, Justice Breyer wrote the plaintiffs had standing and the "question is ripe for resolution."[7]

    “ Under a straightforward application of our precedents, the plaintiffs have standing to sue. The question is ripe for resolution. And, in my view, the plaintiffs should also prevail on the merits. The plain meaning of the governing statutes, decades of historical practice, and uniform interpretations from all three branches of Government demonstrate that aliens without lawful status cannot be excluded from the decennial census solely on account of that status. The Government’s effort to remove them from the apportionment base is unlawful, and I believe this Court should say so.[6] ”
    —Justice Breyer

    Text of the opinion

    Read the full opinion here.

    Oral argument

    The Supreme Court granted a motion allocating 40 minutes per side, rather than the usual 30 minutes per side, for oral argument. The court allotted 40 minutes for the acting solicitor general, 20 minutes for the government appellees, and 20 minutes for the private appellees.[8]

    Audio

    Transcript

    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Supreme Court of the United States, Trump v. New York: "Motion to expedite consideration of the jurisdictional statement filed by appellants," September 22, 2020
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, New York v. Trump, decided September 10, 2020
    3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 Supreme Court of the United States, Trump v. New York: "Questions presented," accessed October 20, 2020
    4. ↑ U.S. Census Bureau, "Questions Planned for the 2020 Census and American Community Survey," March 2018
    5. ↑ U.S. Census Bureau, "What We Do," accessed May 31, 2016
    6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 Supreme Court of the United States, Trump v. New York, decided December 18, 2020
    8. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, "Order list: 592 U.S.," November 20, 2020
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Trump_v._New_York&oldid=9117328"