The Trump administration's effort to add a question on citizenship to the 2020 Census was struck down Wednesday by a second federal judge.

The citizenship question, already blocked by a federal judge in New York and scheduled to be addressed by the Supreme Court next month, received its second strike from District Judge Richard Seeborg.

He becomes the fifth federal judge from the same Northern District of California to rule against the administration on an immigration issue, all of whom were nominated by Presidents Barack Obama or Bill Clinton.

"Including the citizenship question on the 2020 Census is fundamentally counterproductive to the goal of obtaining accurate citizenship data about the public," Seeborg said in his 126-page ruling. "This question is, however, quite effective at depressing self-response rates among immigrants and noncitizens, and poses a significant risk of distorting the apportionment of congressional representation among the states.

"In short, the inclusion of the citizenship question on the 2020 Census threatens the very foundation of our democratic system."

Critics of the administration's effort, including California, the American Civil Liberties Union and immigrant-rights groups, have argued that the Commerce Department is trying to intimidate both undocumented and legal immigrants. If their headcount is suppressed, it could reduce the allocation of federal resources and congressional seats to immigrant communities.

Seeborg said the trial record indicated Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross called for the citizenship question after consulting with officials close to President Donald Trump, including his former counselor Steve Bannon and former Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who headed a commission investigating alleged voter fraud.

"Secretary Ross does not wish his reason for requesting the inclusion of the citizenship question on the 2020 Census to come to light," the judge concluded.

Seeborg's ruling came two months after federal Judge Jesse Furman ruled in New York that Ross exceeded his authority when he announced the inclusion of the citizenship question.

Furman said that the likely undercount of immigrants would mean that California would face "a certainly impending loss of representation in the House of Representatives," and Texas, Arizona, Florida, New York and Illinois would face "a substantial risk of losing a seat."

In addition, he said, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Washington and the District of Columbia likely would be among those losing federal funds.

Following that decision, the Supreme Court agreed last month to squeeze the blockbuster case on to its April calendar, presumably because the decennial census questionnaire is scheduled for printing this summer.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, who initiated the lawsuit, said “justice has prevailed for each and every Californian who should raise their hands to be counted in the 2020 Census without being discouraged by a citizenship question."

Kristen Clarke, president of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which represented San Jose in the case, said the challengers "proved that the justification given for the addition of the citizenship question was nothing more than a pretext to carry out the Trump Administration’s racist agenda.”

More:First lawsuits filed against President Donald Trump's national emergency order

More:Democrats attack Trump immigration policy; Kirstjen Nielsen grilled over family separations

More:Thousands of migrant children report they were sexually assaulted in U.S. custody