developing the census form of notifying the o m b what information is going to be collected printing the census forms addressing the mailing i'm sure many delivered to the to the respondents all these steps are not a necessary part of the before i'm trying to figure out what on earth is irreparable about your injury because as long as they do as they have sad these privacy assessments before they said they're going to do it before those get december th teens and do the privacy assessment and go whoa maybe we shouldn't be collecting this then any injuries on that you're not irreparably injured if they have to change their mind and reprint the forms without the question right you're not injured you're in fact happy about that so don't point to that is your reparable injury as long as they make their assessment before these things are mailed out and twenty one this information is critical to an ongoing mind game if they did it doesn't matter you don't have a right you don't have a right to it coming out you might like it you might prefer it be only have a statutory right to have it before for my assumption january one t date you may want to before that or at the same time that decision came out but that's water under the bridge right but the agency is taking and more steps every day and spending more dollars every day got plenty of time to have your rights about this i'm also just curious about you've got the so you've seen the assessment they did on sent away you know on page five of it they talk about information contained within the major applications and they describe all the protections for the major applications and then they would start listen the next stage page six so this they say here both for the senate wait and for everything listed in the definition of major applications on page six which is this paragraph along with other census forms here's what the protections are all right so you've got you've got this information about santo wade and it's also tell you about send sevens and find santa levin's and th and th and twenty ones and thirty's and thirty six here's here's what we're doing to protect your privacy so your board members that are worried about what's their citizenship information is going to be handled under a few other senses stems for which you for it you already have a lot of information about because they're handling other private information you've got privacy assessments already on the book i don't understand what the increment is that you think you're going to get for a couple of remaining the sound systems is going to be any different from this and any different from the privacy assessments they're very out there and don't you have to show that to the census bureau has been collecting private information more private than your citizenship your members i sent the members you mentioned are not here without documentation so there they are they actually us citizens kinds of privacy assessments some as of the slain regularly time and again including updates since march th teen about how the information helped the information collected is protected how the privacy concerns in the privacy assessment are implemented and now they've set understand oh wait guess what surprise we have all those same protections still here even though now we're asking about citizenship and we have them for these guys from there's two or three other systems not mentioned on this list which you don't yet have the paperwork which should already have privacy assessments for they just haven't said including citizenship but i don't think just saying including my understanding i can double check this but i think the long form was replaced with the american community survey in two thousand and five i believe i'll let you know if i'm wrong about that and it's been the citizenship question has been on the american community survey since two thousand and five there are published privacy impact assessments about the american community survey so you're absolutely right that there is public information about a citizen so you've already done privacy assessments about asking the nd about three million people how many people get that i don't know the exact number but that sounds right you've already got privacy  there about this already is correct i also want to sort of dispel this notion that i think that it has been trying to promote that the census bureau you know just hasn't thought about privacy hasn't thought about how it's going to protect this sort of information what the census bureau does is data collection and again as your honor noted the census bureau collects a whole lot of sensitive information information that is not certainly not meaningfully less sensitive than the citizenship question and the census bureau takes privacy and information security extremely seriously it has privacy impact assessments for i think about probably a couple dozen information systems that are publicly available it reviews and updates these frequently  that there is no legal basis basis for ethics to come in and say you need to change your well developed system for looking at the privacy and information security protections associated with your systems every time that you are simply thinking about adding a new question to the twenty twentieth's and you'll sense is the american community survey or anything us and we're not we're here on the p r i and irreparable injury  it just seems you have this very very high showing of injury that's required here you have to have an exceptional and that's why we even do this stand like we did language but it's a substantial you have to have your reparable privacy assessments are still outstanding and the census bureau is in the process of reviewing those and figuring out whether updates are needed i expect that they will be completed by january twenty times and i don't have any reason to doubt that  don't have any sense of we're going to be them i don't know for sure and i you know the census bureau of course is extraordinarily busy right now and i don't want to commit to any timelines faster than that but the bureau certainly is actively working on these things and you know  right i think it's a sense the state is in its role but i have my understanding is that there are a few forms that if that person or special circumstances they go out earlier than that i do want to be sure to touch on standing because we do think it's an important informational injury in that you have a right like a hipaa type right you know i have this private information and i have a right under this statute to know how it's being handled nothing can be statutory  as there certainly have been about timing when you're and what the what in what time frame are you entitled to get this information but i see him you don't just spew i mean you don't dispute the assessments need to be done before the questionnaires go out in the mail correct we haven't disputed that you don't dispute the value and you don't dispute that once you've done those privacy assessments you need to publish them and they have a right to see them consistent with whatever limitations on sensitive information see this information and to have this information is just a question of time a couple of us for injuries purposes right a couple of responses to that st of all i want to be very clear that if the court thought they had informational standing of course the a person congress created a concrete right to information in people whose privacy is actually threatened where privacy is at stake in a meaningful way and here there is no reason to think that ethics advisory board will have a privacy injury of any kind so we actually don't think thought about what it's doing privacy wise and here's what it's doing to protect that information that they have or it's not just people who have call him very sensitive private information on his handling of personal yes that's right but this court interpreted the statute in this case from year and a half ago when we had read the court's decision to suggest that you know the court held very clearly that because an organization did not have information boards have members in one sense but those are not members in the sense that a membership organization and they have to have an advisory board for someone not advisory board member to be an association we think that they would have to have a constituency of members of the public  you also have to do some work i don't dispute that the membership of the membership organization can be small that here ethics advisory board doesn't have any of the practical english  of different nigeria people who want them and you have your your members who want this information i looked at that and said i still have some sort of quantum gap in information that i'm lacking where out how working the exact same piece of information we're talking about here for just the purpose of the agency's claim that the purpose of this is developed to develop marketable says yes that's the stuff is even maybe even more protective because they're using the american community survey for more analytical reasons right do you dispute that the census bureau information would be good you have any plausible good faith basis for believing that the census question that same piece of information by the same entity for a broader disclosure is part of