Fact check: What is the constitutional basis for the U.S. census?

1. Summary of the results

The constitutional basis for the U.S. census is firmly established in two key provisions of the Constitution. Article I, Section 2 mandates that residents should be tallied every 10 years ^[1]. More specifically, the 14th Amendment provides the primary constitutional foundation, stating that "Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed" ^[2].

This constitutional requirement means that "the whole number of persons in each state" must be included in the decennial apportionment counts, which determine each state's allotment of House seats and Electoral College votes ^{[3] [4] [5]}. The U.S. Census Bureau currently interprets this to mean that "all people (citizens and noncitizens) with a usual residence in the United States are included in the resident population for the census" ^[6].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question, while straightforward, omits several important contextual elements that are currently shaping debates about census implementation:

• Political controversy over inclusion: There is significant political debate about whether undocumented immigrants should be counted, with recent proposals to exclude people in the country illegally from census counts ^{[3] [5] [2]}.
• Broader implications beyond representation: The census serves multiple purposes beyond constitutional requirements, including determining federal funding distribution and ensuring accurate demographic data for various government programs ^[7].
• Historical precedent: Any attempt to exclude certain populations from the census count would be "unprecedented" in U.S. history ^[3].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself contains no misinformation or bias - it is a neutral inquiry about constitutional foundations. However, the question's simplicity could inadvertently obscure the complex political debates currently surrounding census implementation and the interpretation of constitutional requirements.

The question does not acknowledge that while the constitutional basis is clear, there are ongoing disputes about how to interpret phrases like "whole number of persons" in practice, particularly regarding the inclusion of undocumented immigrants in official counts used for apportionment purposes ^{[3] [4] [5] [2]}.