Is performing the census and. counting everyone even illegal immigrants in the constitution of the US
Executive summary
The U.S. Constitution and the 14th Amendment have long driven the decennial census to “count the whole number of persons in each State,” a practice the Census Bureau has applied to residents regardless of citizenship or legal status [1] [2]. Recent political moves and proposals—most prominently Donald Trump’s 2025 announcement to order a census that would exclude undocumented immigrants—seek to change that practice, but experts and courts have treated such exclusions as legally and logistically fraught [3] [4].
1. Constitutional text and historical practice: the 14th Amendment’s “whole number of persons”
The leading constitutional basis for how the census is used for apportionment is Section 2 of the 14th Amendment, which directs that Representatives be apportioned “according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State,” and that principle has been read to require counting all residents, not only citizens [1] [2].
2. Longstanding Census Bureau practice: citizens and non‑citizens have been counted
Since the first census, the Census Bureau has historically enumerated all people living in the U.S., whether citizens, lawful noncitizens, or unauthorized immigrants; modern research and official practice treat the decennial count as a count of residents irrespective of immigration status [1] [2] [5].
3. Policy fight: political efforts to exclude noncitizens and to add a citizenship question
Republican lawmakers and activists have pushed legislative and administrative routes to limit counting to citizens for apportionment, including bills like the proposed Equal Representation Act and renewed calls to ask citizenship on the 2030 census; proponents argue noncitizens skew representation, while opponents warn of undercounts and legal conflicts [6] [7] [8].
4. Executive directives and the legal friction they create
President Trump’s 2025 public order to create a “new” census excluding people in the country illegally triggered immediate skepticism from legal and census experts: prior attempts to exclude undocumented immigrants—through executive orders and memoranda in 2020—faced judicial blocks and reversals, and courts have been central to resolving such disputes [3] [9] [4].
5. Technical obstacles: how would you practically exclude people?
Excluding undocumented immigrants would require new questions and methods to distinguish legal status on the census questionnaire; experts warn that asking about citizenship or legal status risks lower response rates and major data quality problems, especially among vulnerable communities, undermining the reliability of any resulting apportionment numbers [4].
6. Stakes: representation, Electoral College, and federal funds
Counting or excluding noncitizens affects House apportionment and thus Electoral College votes; researchers and policy centers show that removing unauthorized immigrants from apportionment could shift a handful of congressional seats between states and affect the distribution of federal program dollars that rely on population counts [1] [5] [10].
7. Evidence on the partisan impact is contested
Analyses differ on how large partisan effects would be; some commentators and conservative groups argue that Democratic-leaning states gain seats by counting noncitizens, while academic work and fact‑checks show the net partisan shifts are smaller than some claims suggest and depend on demographic distribution and methodological assumptions [1] [2] [7].
8. Courts, Congress and timing are decisive — not the president alone
Experts emphasized that a unilateral executive order to exclude undocumented immigrants would face legal challenges and that other issues—like timing of the decennial census and statutory processes—would likely require Congress’s consent and court resolution before such a change could take effect [4] [9].
9. What reporting does not answer directly
Available sources do not mention a definitive Supreme Court ruling that permanently resolves whether apportionment must include noncitizens for all future censuses; they also do not provide a finalized, legally implemented plan from 2025 that shows how a legally sustainable excluded‑immigrant census would be executed [4] [3].
10. Bottom line for the question “Is counting everyone — including undocumented immigrants — in the Constitution?”
The Constitution, via the 14th Amendment, mandates apportionment by the “whole number of persons,” and historical and scholarly practice has treated that as a count of all residents regardless of legal status [1] [2]. Political actors have challenged that practice and proposed excluding undocumented immigrants, but such efforts face substantial legal, technical and congressional obstacles and remain disputed in courts and policy debate [3] [4] [6].