Fact check: How does the U.S. Census Bureau define a resident for census purposes?

1. Summary of the results

The U.S. Census Bureau defines a resident for census purposes as a person who lives and sleeps most of the time at a particular location, which is referred to as their 'usual residence' ^[1]. This definition is guided by constitutional and statutory mandates to count all residents of the several states ^[1].

The constitutional foundation for this definition stems from the 14th Amendment, which requires the census to include the 'whole number of persons in each state' ^{[2] [3] [4]}. This constitutional language suggests that the Census Bureau's definition of a resident includes all individuals living in the United States, regardless of their immigration status ^{[3] [5]}.

The census is designed to 'count every resident in the United States' according to the census website ^[5], and technical documentation implies that residents include both citizens and non-citizens living in the United States ^[6].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks important context about the ongoing political debate surrounding census residency definitions. Recent political developments show that there are competing interpretations of who should be counted as a resident:

• Constitutional perspective: The 14th Amendment's requirement to count the "whole number of persons" has historically been interpreted to include all individuals physically present in the United States, regardless of legal status ^{[2] [3]}
• Political challenge: There have been unprecedented attempts to exclude undocumented immigrants from census counts, which would contradict the traditional constitutional interpretation ^{[2] [3] [5]}

The question also omits the practical implications of residency definitions, including their impact on congressional apportionment and federal funding distribution, which are directly tied to population counts.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question appears neutral and factual, seeking a straightforward definition without apparent bias. However, it lacks acknowledgment of the current political controversy surrounding this definition.

The question's framing as a simple definitional inquiry could inadvertently obscure the fact that census residency definitions are currently subject to significant political pressure and legal challenges ^{[2] [3] [5]}. This omission might lead readers to believe the definition is settled and uncontroversial, when in fact it represents a constitutionally significant issue with major implications for political representation and resource allocation.

The timing and context of such questions should be considered, as they may arise during periods when powerful political actors seek to alter long-standing census practices for potential electoral or representational advantages.