Department of Commerce, Petitioners v. New York

Summary

A unanimous Court on Parts I-II held that several state respondents have Article III standing because an undercount of noncitizen households would imminently cost them federally allocated funds, and that the Enumeration Clause, informed by two centuries of open and unchallenged practice, permits Congress and the Secretary of Commerce to ask about citizenship on the decennial census. By shifting majorities, the Court held the Secretary's decision judicially reviewable under the APA, sustained his choice to combine a citizenship question with administrative records as a reasonable exercise of discretion, found compliance with Census Act sections 6(c) and 141(f), but agreed with the District Court that the sole stated rationale - a DOJ Voting Rights Act enforcement request - was contrived, affirming the District Court's remand to the agency; the District Court judgment was accordingly affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh, dissented from the pretext holding as an unprecedented departure from deferential review; Justice Breyer, joined by Justice Ginsburg, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan, would also have held the decision substantively arbitrary and capricious; and Justice Alito would have held the decision unreviewable under APA section 701(a)(2), dismissing the non-constitutional claims.