A proposed question in the 2020 Census, “Is this person a citizen of the United States?”, has found itself the subject of much controversy and several court cases. One such case has been brought by the State of California and several cities. The plaintiffs argue that the inclusion of the question — which was last asked in the 1950 Census — violates the U.S. Constitution’s Enumeration Clause.

The clause, which says, “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed,” determines how many Congressional seats each State gets. Anything that impacts counting could potentially impact representation in Washington where the seats in the 435 member House of Representatives (and hence those in the Electoral College) are apportioned according to State population.

States are concerned that asking a citizenship question will serve as a deterrent to those in the U.S. illegally, or to those who may be apprehensive of having their information shared with law enforcement, perhaps because they have defaulted on loans, or owe child support, etc. While there are laws to protect identifying information from being passed on to law enforcement and the FBI, these are not widely known, or if known, do not adequately assuage concerns of respondents.

Undercounting could also result in States losing their share of $800 billion in federal funding that is linked to population. Funding for schools, housing assistance, Medicaid, epidemic preparedness and national disasters could be impacted.

Not surprisingly, many State and local authorities were alarmed when Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross announced last March that the Census would carry a citizenship question. The decision, according to the administration, was to better enforce the Voting Rights Act — a law to ensure the equal protection of voting rights across race. Those challenging it are sceptical of the motives and believe that the question is being added to intimidate and deter immigrants, especially Hispanics, from participating in the Census and that Mr. Ross had made “shifting and inaccurate” statements about the need to include the question.

The biggest losers

Some 24.3 million people are likely to avoid participating in the Census, according to Robert Shapiro of Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business. Mr. Shapiro, a former bureaucrat, had overseen the Census in 2000. Comparing State-wise poverty rates to the national average, he argues that while the biggest losers in terms of Congressional seats will be blue States, ironically, it is mostly red States that will suffer funding losses. Additionally, the lack of funds will hit the poor disproportionately in these States.

In November, a New York court heard a case brought by 18 States and several cities, challenging the question’s inclusion. While the Donald Trump administration could not get the Supreme Court to halt the case, it did succeed in preventing Mr. Ross being deposed over his reasoning for having the question included. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments in February about whether Mr. Ross can be deposed over his motives. A few days ago, a top Democrat said Mr. Ross will be called before a House committee to testify about allegations that he misled Congress on the Census question.

Given that the subsequent census is only in 2030, the outcome of these battles will have far-reaching consequences.

Sriram Lakshman works for The Hindu and is based in Washington DC