CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION

Federal Judicial Center 9/4/2023 1

Enjoining Truncated Data Collection 

for the 2020 Census 

National Urban League v. Ross 

(Lucy H. Koh, N.D. Cal. 5:20-cv-5799) 

An August 2020 federal complaint filed in the Northern District of 

California challenged a recent decision to cut short data collection 

for the 2020 census. A temporary restraining order issued eighteen 

days later enjoined the truncated data-collection schedule. Another 

nineteen days later, the district court issued a preliminary injunction, but nineteen days after that, the Supreme Court stayed the injunction. Following an amended complaint and a January 2021 

change in administration, the case was resolved by settlement. 

Subject: District lines. Topics: Malapportionment; Covid-19; 

case assignment. 

According to a federal complaint filed in the Northern District of California 

on August 18, 2020, 

This lawsuit challenges the unconstitutional and illegal decision by Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross, and Census Bureau . . . Director Steven 

Dillingham to sacrifice the accuracy of the 2020 Census by forcing the Census Bureau to compress eight and a half months of vital data-collection and 

data-processing into four and a half months, against the judgment of the 

Bureau’s staff and in the midst of a once-in-a-century pandemic.1

The initial plaintiffs in the action were three organizations, two counties, 

three cities, and two county officials.2 Three days later, the court assigned the 

case to Judge Lucy H. Koh as related to two cases already pending before 

her,3 and Judge Koh scheduled a case-management videoconference for August 26.4

The related cases, which included some plaintiffs in the new case, challenged President Trump’s decision to exclude unauthorized immigrants 

from Congressional apportionment counts.5 A three-judge district court determined on October 22 that excluding unauthorized immigrants from 

House of Representatives apportionments “has already been rejected by the 

1. Complaint at 1, Nat’l Urban League v. Ross, No. 5:20-cv-5799 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 

2020), D.E. 1. 

2. Id. at 7–12. 

3. Order, id. (Aug. 21, 2020), D.E. 29; see Judicial Referral, id. (Aug. 18, 2020), D.E. 6 (referral by the assigned magistrate judge for possible relatedness). 

Judge Koh was elevated to the court of appeals on December 14, 2021. Federal Judicial 

Center Biographical Directory of Article III Federal Judges, www.fjc.gov/history/judges. 

4. Order, Nat’l Urban League, No. 5:20-cv-5799 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2020), D.E. 31; see 

Transcript, id. (Aug. 26, 2020, filed Sept. 3, 2020), D.E. 65. 

5. Amended Complaint, California v. Trump, No. 5:20-cv-5169 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 24, 

2020), D.E. 28; Amended Complaint, City of San Jose v. Trump, No. 5:20-cv-5167 (N.D. Cal. 

Aug. 18, 2020), D.E. 46. 
Enjoining Truncated Data Collection for the 2020 Census 

2 Federal Judicial Center 9/4/2023 

Constitution, the applicable statutes, and 230 years of history.”6 The Supreme 

Court, however, ordered the case dismissed on December 28 for lack of jurisdiction.7

 Ten days before that, the Supreme Court concluded in a case arising in the Southern District of New York, “Everyone agrees by now that the 

Government cannot feasibly [exclude] the estimated 10.5 million aliens 

without lawful status.”8 It was no more than speculative whether the government would attempt to exclude unauthorized immigrants from apportionment.9

Meanwhile, the plaintiffs in the August 18 case filed an amended complaint adding additional plaintiffs on September 110 and a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) on September 3.11 Judge Koh heard the motion on Friday, September 4.12

On Saturday, September 5, Judge Koh issued a TRO enjoining the Census 

Bureau from “winding down or altering any Census field operations” until a 

September 17, 2020, preliminary-injunction hearing.13

The government defendants briefed the court on their compliance efforts 

on Tuesday, the day of a case-management conference:14

Immediately upon receiving the TRO around 10 p.m. Eastern time on September 5, Defendants began taking steps to determine what concrete efforts 

would be required for Defendants to come into compliance with the TRO. 

. . . 

The night of Sunday, September 6, Defendants transmitted a detailed 

list of instructions to Regional Directors regarding what steps the field offices must take and what they must refrain from doing to comply with the 

TRO. . . . 

Defendants understand that, by its terms, the TRO is effective until the 

Court holds the scheduled preliminary injunction hearing on September 17, 

2020. Defendants will fully comply with the TRO in the meantime. If the 

Court intends to extend the TRO or otherwise believes that the effect of the 

TRO lasts beyond September 17, Defendants respectfully request that the 

6. City of San Jose v. Trump, 497 F. Supp. 3d 680, 687 (N.D. Cal. 2020). 

7. Trump v. City of San Jose, 592 U.S. ___, 141 S. Ct. 1231 (2020). 

8. Trump v. New York, 592 U.S. ___, ___, 141 S. Ct. 530, 536 (2020), vacating 485 F. 

Supp. 3d 422 (S.D.N.Y. 2020); see New York v. Trump, 490 F. Supp. 3d 736 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) 

(denying a stay); Docket Sheet, New York v. Trump, No. 1:20-cv-5770 (S.D.N.Y. July 24, 

2020). 

9. Trump, 592 U.S. at ___, 141 S. Ct. at 535–36. 

10. Amended Complaint, Nat’l Urban League v. Ross, No. 5:20-cv-5799 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 

1, 2020), D.E. 61 (adding as plaintiffs an organization, a California city, a California county, 

and two American Indian entities); see Nat’l Urban League v. Ross, 489 F. Supp. 3d 939, 950 

(N.D. Cal. 2020); Nat’l Urban League v. Ross, 484 F. Supp. 3d 802, 804 (N.D. Cal. 2020). 

11. Temporary-Restraining-Order Motion, Nat’l Urban League, No. 5:20-cv-5799 (N.D. 

Cal. Sept. 3, 2020), D.E. 66. 

12. Transcript, id. (Sept. 4, 2020, filed Sept. 5, 2020), D.E. 82. 

13. Nat’l Urban League, 484 F. Supp. 3d at 808; see Bob Egelko, Judge Halts Shutdown of 

Census Bureau Tally, S.F. Chron., Sept. 7, 2020, at B1. 

14. Transcript, Nat’l Urban League, No. 5:20-cv-5799 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 8, 2020, filed Sept. 

11, 2020), D.E. 98. 
Enjoining Truncated Data Collection for the 2020 Census 

Federal Judicial Center 9/4/2023 3

Court convert the TRO to a preliminary injunction now in order to afford 

adequate time for any appellate review.15

On September 14, Judge Koh set the case for a hearing the following afternoon regarding allegations of the defendants’ noncompliance.16 On September 17, Judge Koh extended the TRO seven days and reset the preliminary-injunction hearing for September 22 because of the defendants’ not 

producing the administrative record on time.17

On September 24, Judge Koh issued a preliminary injunction staying the 

Census Bureau’s September 30 deadline for the completion of data collection 

and its December 31 deadline for reporting the tabulation of the total population.18 By a vote of two to one, the court of appeals denied the defendants 

an administrative stay of the injunction on September 30.19

Here, not only would the status quo be upended by an administrative stay, 

the Bureau’s ability to resume field operations would be left in serious 

doubt. . . . 

. . . 

Given the extraordinary importance of the census, it is imperative that 

the Bureau conduct the census in a manner that is most likely to produce a 

workable report in which the public can have confidence.20

In light of the defendants’ injunction violations, Judge Koh issued an order on October 1 clarifying the injunction and noting, “The Court will subject Defendants to sanctions or contempt proceedings if Defendants violate 

the Injunction Order again.”21

On October 7, a new panel of the court of appeals gave the government 

partial relief: 

The government has . . . failed to meet its burden to justify a stay pending appeal as to the district court’s injunction of the September 30, 2020 data collection deadline. 

. . . 

[But t]o the extent that the district court enjoined the Defendants from 

attempting to meet the [statutory] December 31 date, that injunction is 

stayed pending appeal.22

15. Notice, id. (Sept. 8, 2020), D.E. 86. 

16. Order, id. (Sept. 14, 2020), D.E. 113. 

17. Opinion, id. (Sept. 17, 2020), D.E. 142; see Nat’l Urban League v. Ross, 489 F. Supp. 

3d 939, 950 (N.D. Cal. 2020). 

18. Nat’l Urban League, 489 F. Supp. 3d at 1003; Nat’l Urban League v. Ross, 977 F.3d 

698, 700 (9th Cir. 2020); see Bob Egelko, Judge Rules Census Count Must Not Be Ended Early, 

S.F. Chron., Sept. 26, 2020, at B1; Michael Wines, Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration from Ending the Census Count Early, N.Y. Times, Sept. 26, 2020, at A16. 

19. Nat’l Urban League, 977 F.3d 698; see Bob Egelko, Court Thwarts Move to Conclude 

Census Count Early, S.F. Chron., Oct. 1, 2020, at B1. 

20. Nat’l Urban League, 977 F.3d at 701–02. 

21. Nat’l Urban League v. Ross, 491 F. Supp. 3d 572, 584 (N.D. Cal. 2020); see Bob 

Egelko, Judge’s Order: Census Count Must Continue, S.F. Chron., Oct. 3, 2020, at B1. 

22. Nat’l Urban League, 977 F.3d at 780–81. 
Enjoining Truncated Data Collection for the 2020 Census 

4 Federal Judicial Center 9/4/2023 

But, over Justice Sotomayor’s dissent, the Supreme Court stayed the injunction on October 13 “pending disposition of the appeal in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and disposition of the petition 

for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is timely sought.”23

On December 22, Judge Koh denied a motion to dismiss a second 

amended complaint or stay proceedings.24 Five days before the inauguration 

of a new President, however, Judge Koh approved a stipulated stay “in order 

to provide for an orderly transition and to let the new Administration assess 

this case.”25 On January 22, 2021, news media reported, 

After the bureau missed a year-end deadline for turning in the apportionment numbers, it said the figures would be completed as close to the 

previous deadline as possible. Trump administration attorneys recently said 

they won’t be ready until early March because the bureau needs time to fix 

irregularities in the data.26

Judge Koh dismissed the case as settled on April 22, 2021,27 and the court 

of appeals accepted a voluntary dismissal of the appeal five days later.28 According to the San Francisco Chronicle, 

Under the settlement, population figures to be released [soon] will inform states how many congressional seats they will have in 2022, said attorney Thomas Wolf of the Brenan Center for Justice at New York University. 

After further Census Bureau analysis and reports, he said, data allowing 

states to draw district lines based on equal populations will be available by 

the end of September.29

23. Ross v. Nat’l Urban League, 592 U.S. ___, 141 S. Ct. 18 (2020); see Bob Egelko, High 

Court Overturns Ruling, Halts 2020 Census, S.F. Chron., Oct. 14, 2020, at B1; Adam Liptak & 

Michael Wines, Supreme Court Permits Freeze of Census, Giving Trump a Win, N.Y. Times, 

Oct. 14, 2020, at A1; David G. Savage, Justices Rule That Administration Can Halt Census 

Counting Early, L.A. Times, Oct. 14, 2020, at A1. 

24. Nat’l Urban League v. Ross, 508 F. Supp. 3d 663 (N.D. Cal. 2020); see Second 

Amended Complaint, Nat’l Urban League v. Ross, No. 5:20-cv-5799 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 27, 

2020), D.E. 352. 

25. Stipulated Order, Nat’l Urban League, No. 5:20-cv-5799 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2021), 

D.E. 456. 

26. Time and Transparency Needed as Biden Inherits Frazzled Census, L.A. Times, Jan. 

22, 2021, at A1. 

27. Order, Nat’l Urban League, No. 5:20-cv-5799 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 22, 2021), D.E. 489. 

28. Order, Nat’l Urban League v. Ross, No. 20-16868 (9th Cir. Apr. 27, 2021), D.E. 67. 

29. Bob Egelko, Settlement Means Census Counts All, Regardless of Status, S.F. Chron., 

Apr. 23, 2021, at A10.