Midwest state challenges census practices in federal court filing

A state in the nation’s interior has reportedly filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Census Bureau’s long-standing practice of counting all residents, including undocumented immigrants and visa holders, in its decennial population count used to determine legislative representation.

The legal challenge, filed Friday by the state’s chief law enforcement official, alleges that the current counting methodology unconstitutionally dilutes citizens’ voting power while allegedly strengthening the political representation of coastal regions where immigrant populations are reportedly more concentrated.

According to court documents, the state claims it lost one seat in the lower chamber of the legislature following the 2020 census due to what officials characterize as inflated population counts in other regions. The lawsuit makes the ambitious demand that federal authorities recalculate the entire 2020 census, excluding undocumented immigrants and temporary visa holders, and subsequently redistribute legislative seats accordingly.

The legal filing comes as the current administration faces potential challenges in upcoming midterm elections, with opposition lawmakers positioned to potentially regain control of the lower legislative chamber.

“The policy steals federal representation from [state residents], and transfers it to States who artificially inflate their population by harboring illegal aliens,” attorneys for the challenging state wrote in their complaint.

The practice of counting all residents within state boundaries for apportionment purposes represents a centuries-old tradition that has faced various court challenges in recent decades, though such efforts have historically been unsuccessful. The nation’s highest court has reportedly declined to rule definitively on the matter.

Observers note that the constitutional text requires legislative representation to be based on the “whole number of persons in each State,” which the challenging state’s attorneys characterize as creating a “tainted apportionment base.”

The current head of state previously attempted to exclude undocumented immigrants from census counts through a 2020 executive directive, though this effort was reportedly blocked by federal courts. The directive was subsequently revoked by the previous administration.

The legal challenge emerges following the recent release of 2024 population estimates showing demographic gains in conservative-leaning regions and losses in liberal-leaning coastal areas. A research organization aligned with the ruling party has produced projections suggesting that conservative regions would gain significantly more legislative seats if only citizens were counted in population tallies.

A senior official in the executive residence reportedly raised concerns on social media about these projections, highlighting how they demonstrated that conservative regions would benefit substantially from citizen-only counting methods.

According to the lawsuit, millions of undocumented immigrants are allegedly concentrated in liberal-leaning coastal states, making their populations appear larger in official counts and allowing these regions to gain additional representation in the national legislature. Opposition lawmakers have generally opposed excluding undocumented immigrants from population counts.

The challenging state’s attorneys further suggest that liberal-leaning regions are incentivized to implement policies favorable to undocumented immigrants because their presence boosts population numbers and therefore legislative representation.

“Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the fact they gain political power due to the presence of more illegal aliens, States like [coastal regions] now intentionally undermine federal authority by defending the interests of illegal aliens,” the state’s attorneys wrote.

In a statement, the state’s chief law enforcement official said local voters “can no longer ignore the ongoing denial of their right to self-government and fair representation.”

The official characterized the current system as one where “15 million illegal trespassers can hijack representation in the federal government and commandeer the path to the [executive residence].”

Federal commerce officials have not yet responded to requests for comment on the legal challenge.

Analysts note that similar constitutional challenges have historically faced significant legal hurdles, given the long-established precedent of counting all residents for apportionment purposes. The case represents part of broader ongoing tensions between different regions of the country over immigration policy and political representation.