Mr. Ross tried to force the opposite. Mr. Seeborg concluded that “despite unrefuted evidence produced by the professional staff of the Census Bureau that inclusion of a citizenship question would likely result in a significant differential decline in self-response rates within noncitizen and Latino communities and that the requested data could be obtained by other means, Secretary Ross insisted upon adding the citizenship question to the census.”
In order to do so, he engaged in “a cynical search to find some reason, any reason, or an agency request to justify that preordained result.” He turned to the Justice Department, persuading the agency to request that the decennial census collect citizenship data, in “an effort to concoct a rationale bearing no plausible relation to the real reason, whatever that may be, underlying the decision.” It is not difficult to discern the most likely reason. Mr. Ross — or his co-conspirators in the Justice Department and the White House — sought to sabotage the census count, discouraging responses from immigrants. Lower immigrant response rates would lead to less federal money and political representation for areas that lean Democratic.
In fact, because Mr. Ross’s move “affirmatively interferes with the actual enumeration and fulfills no reasonable governmental purpose,” Mr. Seeborg found, it violates the Constitution’s enumeration clause, which mandates a national census every 10 years. This goes even further than U.S. District Judge Jesse M. Furman’s strongly worded ruling against Mr. Ross in January.
The Supreme Court announced last month that it would consider the census question this term, which means it will render a decision by the end of June. As Mr. Seeborg and Mr. Furman argued, the record of Mr. Ross’s misuse of authority is clear. The justices have their pick of reasons to forbid the Commerce Department from sabotaging the census.