Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-366_7647.pdf
Page Number: 8.0

Cite as:  592 U. S. ____ (2020) 

1 

BREYER, J., dissenting 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 20–366 
_________________ 

DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE 
UNITED STATES, ET AL., APPELLANTS 
v. NEW YORK, ET AL. 

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR 
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

[December 18, 2020]

 JUSTICE  BREYER,  with  whom  JUSTICE  SOTOMAYOR  and 

JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting. 

The Constitution specifies that the number of Represent-
atives afforded to each State is based on an apportionment 
of the total population, with each State receiving its propor-
tional share.  The Government has announced a policy to
exclude  aliens  without  lawful  status  from  the  apportion-
ment base for the decennial census.  The Government does 
not deny that, if carried out, the policy will harm the plain-
tiffs.  Nor  does  it  deny  that  it  will  implement  that  policy 
imminently  (to  the  extent  it  is  able  to  do  so).    Under  a 
straightforward application of our precedents, the plaintiffs 
have standing to sue.  The question is ripe for resolution. 
And,  in  my  view,  the  plaintiffs  should  also prevail  on  the 
merits.  The plain meaning of the governing statutes, dec-
ades  of  historical  practice,  and  uniform  interpretations
from  all  three  branches  of  Government  demonstrate  that 
aliens  without  lawful  status  cannot  be  excluded  from  the 
decennial census solely on account of that status.  The Gov-
ernment’s  effort  to  remove  them  from  the  apportionment 
base is unlawful, and I believe this Court should say so. 

The Court disagrees.  It argues that it is now uncertain
just how fully the Secretary will implement the Presiden-
tial memorandum.  In my view, that uncertainty does not