Fact check: How did the 2019 Supreme Court decision influence the 2020 US Census and subsequent redistricting?

1. Summary of the results

The 2019 Supreme Court decision had a significant impact on the 2020 US Census and subsequent redistricting by blocking the Trump administration's attempt to add a citizenship question to census forms. The Court ruled that the Commerce Department's justification for adding the question was "pretextual" and did not pass legal scrutiny ^[1]. This decision ensured that the 2020 Census would continue the constitutional practice of counting all persons regardless of citizenship status ^[2].

The ruling prevented what could have been a substantial undercount of certain populations, which would have directly affected redistricting and congressional representation ^[2]. The Census Bureau released the 2020 Census redistricting data in August 2021, providing states with population counts for redrawing congressional and state legislative district boundaries, but this data did not include citizenship status information ^[3].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question omits several crucial developments and ongoing controversies:

• President Trump has called for a "new" census that would exclude people living in the country without legal status, which would represent an unprecedented change to how the country has conducted population tallies since the first U.S. census in 1790 ^{[4] [5]}.
• The Supreme Court's 2019 decision did not rule on whether people without legal status can be excluded by the president from apportionment counts, leaving this constitutional question unresolved ^[4].
• While the Court blocked the citizenship question, it also made holdings that misconstrue the law and overturned much of the lower court's findings regarding violations under the Administrative Procedure Act ^[2].
• The Constitution requires the Census to count the "whole number of persons in each state," and any attempt to exclude certain groups could violate this constitutional requirement ^[4].
• Any changes to the census process would need to be made through Congress, as the Constitution mandates the Census be taken every 10 years with specific procedures ^[6].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question appears neutral and factual, asking about the relationship between the Supreme Court decision and census/redistricting processes. However, it lacks important context about:

• The ongoing political attempts to manipulate census data for partisan advantage, which critics argue could impact federal funding and representation ^[7].
• The constitutional implications of excluding certain populations from the census count, which has been a consistent practice since 1790 ^[4].
• The fact that this remains an active political issue with potential future implications for the 2030 Census, rather than a settled historical matter ^{[6] [5]}.

The question could benefit from acknowledging that the 2019 decision was part of a broader political strategy to influence representation and that attempts to exclude undocumented immigrants from census counts continue to be pursued despite constitutional concerns ^[5].