How did the 14th Amendment define 'citizens' and 'persons' for census apportionment?

1. What the Amendment’s text did: from “three‑fifths” to “whole number of persons”

Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment removed the pre‑Civil War compromise that had apportioned representation by counting free persons plus three‑fifths of enslaved people, instead specifying that representatives be apportioned by “counting the whole number of persons in each State” ^{[5] [1]}. Historical summaries and House records emphasize that the change eliminated fractional counting of enslaved people and directed a full‑person count for apportionment ^{[2] [5]}.

2. How “persons” has been read in administration and law: resident population, not only citizens

Federal law and Census Bureau materials implement the Amendment by using total resident population as the apportionment base: that is, everyone whose usual residence is in a state on Census Day, regardless of citizenship or legal status ^{[3] [4]}. Government explanations and legal analyses repeatedly state that apportionment calculations count the whole number of persons and that the apportionment population includes citizens and noncitizens ^{[3] [6]}.

3. The lingering constitutional exception: “Indians not taxed”

The Amendment’s clause retains the old Constitution’s narrow exception—“excluding Indians not taxed”—but modern authorities report that this phrase no longer has practical effect because by the mid‑20th century there were no longer American Indians who fit that classification for apportionment purposes ^{[2] [4]}. Historical and Census references note the phrase as part of the text but treat it as obsolete in practice ^[2].

4. Contemporary disputes: citizenship vs. whole persons

Recent political debates have proposed counting only citizens for apportionment; advocates for the whole‑person approach point to the Amendment’s wording and long practice to rebut that idea, while critics of the current practice argue political effects and urge change ^{[7] [8]}. Civil‑rights organizations and legal analysts have said excluding noncitizens from apportionment would likely require a constitutional amendment because the Fourteenth Amendment and existing statutes direct a resident, whole‑person count ^{[7] [9]}.

5. Judicial and administrative posture: practice matters

Court decisions and administrative practice emphasize Congress’s broad authority over census methodology but also recognize the Fourteenth Amendment’s apportionment mandate; the House clerk and statutes implement apportionment using total resident persons and the established apportionment methods ^{[10] [4]}. Analyses of recent litigation and policy proposals show disputes over whether and how to count noncitizens have arisen, but federal practice has continued to use total resident population ^{[10] [4]}.

6. What sources do and do not say about “citizen” vs. “person”

Available sources consistently show the Amendment chose the word “persons” for apportionment and that implementation counts residents regardless of citizenship ^{[1] [3]}. Sources do not claim the Amendment defines the term “citizen” for apportionment purposes beyond Section 1’s citizenship clause; instead, they separate Section 1’s citizenship definition from Section 2’s apportionment directive and report that lawmakers expressly chose “persons” over “citizens” when drafting apportionment rules ^{[11] [7]}.

7. Practical consequences and political context

Scholarship and advocacy pieces link the language choice to political effects—apportionment based on all residents shapes House seats and Electoral College votes, and proposals to change the base have partisan implications ^{[6] [8]}. Analysts note that excluding noncitizens would alter allocations, but empirical projections of how much and where vary and have produced contested results ^[6].

Conclusion: The Fourteenth Amendment replaced the three‑fifths rule with an explicit command to count “the whole number of persons in each State” for apportionment, and federal practice and statutory guidance implement that command by using the total resident population (including noncitizens), with only the obsolete “Indians not taxed” exception remaining in the text ^{[1] [3] [2]}.