E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
The Census, Reapportionment, and Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment
Gerard N. Magliocca
On Friday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Administration's effort to exclude from the population tally for the upcoming reapportionment people who are in the United States illegally. There is little chance that the Administration will win this case. I do hope, though, that at least one of the Justices will flag the serious constitutional flaw in the reapportionment statutes that I analyzed in this article two years ago. Time is running out for Congress to address the conflict between current reapportionment law and Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment. If no action is taken, then there is a real risk that the next reapportionment could be delayed beyond 2022.
Section Two of the Fourteenth Amendment is at the heart of Trump v. New York. First, Section Two sets forth only one exception to counting everyone for representation--"Indians not taxed." Second, Section Two contemplates separating the total population only from the population of presumptive voters whose right to vote is being "denied" or "in any way abridged." People who are in the United States illegally are neither "Indians not taxed" nor presumptive voters (as Section Two limits that class to citizens). Thus, the President's instruction to the Commerce Secretary that certain non-citizens be excluded or separated from the population count is unconstitutional.
Since Section Two must be addressed in any sensible assessment of the Administration's policy on the merits, the broader issue of how the reapportionment statutes violate Section Two is on the table. The Court need not address that point now, but a separate opinion making the point might spur congressional action next year.