Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-366_7647.pdf
Page Number: 20.0

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

13 

BREYER, J., dissenting 

history is clear as to the statute’s reach; it includes the peo-
ple who reside here, lawful status or not. 

Third,  the  records  from  the  legislative  debate  confirm
that Congress was aware that the words of the statute bore
this meaning.  By 1929, federal immigration laws had been
on the books for more than four decades, if not longer.  See 
Kleindienst  v.  Mandel,  408  U. S.  753,  761  (1972).    Some 
state  laws  for  apportioning  representatives  explicitly  ex-
cluded aliens, aware that an apportionment based simply 
on “the whole number of persons” under the federal decen-
nial  census  would  otherwise  include  them.    See  71  Cong.
Rec. 1977 (1929) (discussing a New York state statute that 
defined  the  apportionment  base  to  include  the  number  of
“inhabitants, excluding aliens”).  Time and again through-
out  the  debate  over  what  became  the  1929  Act,  members 
considered  (and  rejected)  proposals  that  would  have  ex-
cluded aliens from the apportionment base.  See, e.g., id., at 
2065–2068, 2360, 2451–2455.  The debates evince a shared 
understanding  that  without  such  an  amendment,  the  Act 
would include those “aliens” present “without the consent
of the American people.”  Id., at 1919.  See also id., at 1976 
(Sen.  Barkley)  (discussing  “unlawful  immigrants”  “who
have no legal status”).  This understanding was shaped not 
only by the ordinary meaning of the words, but also by leg-
islators’ view of the meaning of those words as they appear
in the Constitution. 

In  particular,  Senator  David  A.  Reed  of  Pennsylvania
noted his support for the policy of excluding aliens without 
lawful status, but refrained from voting in favor of a pro-
posal to do just that because he did not believe that the Con-
stitution allowed it.  Id., at 1958.  See also id., at 1821–1822 
(reprinting  C. Turney,  Power  Of Congress To  Exclude  Al-
iens From Enumeration For Purposes Of Apportionment Of 
Representatives (April 30, 1929)); 71 Cong. Rec. 2065–2066 
(discussing a proposed amendment that would immediately 
remove aliens from apportionment “upon the ratification of