by Winston Wendell
When I first read about the changes to the 2030 census proposed by the Trump administration, I knew it would make national headlines and turn into a political scandal. The provisions under consideration would exclude millions of people from being counted, change the funding formula, and favor redistricting that benefits Republicans.
I want to discuss what the changes mean and explain why they have caused such a stir in Washington, DC.
The Substance of the 2030 Census Changes
The provisions that the Trump administration wants to see in the 2030 census report are of a radical nature. Here are some key changes that the government wants to make:
- Redefining “usual residence” as the place of “primary physical presence” during the year of the census. The administration would use income-tax filings and W-2 tax forms to determine a person’s “primary physical presence”
- Excluding undocumented immigrants and legal residents who do not have residency on April 1, 2030, from the count. The 2020 census count included all foreigners, legal and illegal. The reasoning behind this provision is that it is an unconstitutional interpretation of “whole number of persons”
- Removing questions on race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. The rationale is that it is outside the constitutional powers of the federal government to collect this information.
To justify excluding non-citizens from the count, the administration has interpreted “whole number of persons” to mean “inhabitants” that have a “qualified” relationship with the political system. It is worth noting that many of these policies have been advocated by President Trump and the Heritage Foundation in Project 2025, a document outlining policies that a Republican administration would implement through executive orders.
Reaction to the Trump Census Proposal
Not surprisingly, the proposals have been met with derision and outright condemnation from Democrats and civil libertarians.
The argument that only “qualified” persons should be counted is an assault on the equal sovereignty of every American citizen that goes against the spirit and intent of the Constitution.
Letitia James, the attorney general of New York, called the proposals “a radical revision of the US Census” and said that she was considering taking legal action to block the changes because of their “unpatriotic” nature.
In the past, Ms. James has successfully sued to block similar changes to the census, and she will undoubtedly take similar actions in the future. Ms. James stated, “The Constitution says what the Constitution says. Every person who is present in the United States should be counted, period,”
Mr. Roberts of the Center for American Progress reacted to the proposal by saying that it was “a blatant attack on our democracy and a means to gerrymander our way to victory at the expense of minorities and public policy.”
Mr. Roberts added that he expected litigation to challenge the new changes and that the Court would eventually rule on whether the changes were constitutional or not.
He concluded, “Congress is the only body that can decide if this change is appropriate or not. Nevertheless, the public will have thirty days to respond to the request for comments and express their opinions on the issue.”
Blue Press Journal 