You are on page 1of 66
 
 
No. 20-366
 In the Supreme Court of the United States
 
D
ONALD
J.
 
T
RUMP
,
 
P
RESIDENT OF THE
U
NITED
S
TATES
,
 ET AL
.,
 APPELLANTS
 
v.
 S
TATE OF
N
EW
 Y 
ORK
,
 ET AL
.
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT  FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
BRIEF FOR THE APPELLANTS
J
EFFREY
B.
 
 W 
 ALL
 
 Acting Solicitor General Counsel of Record
J
EFFREY
B
OSSERT
C
LARK
 
 Acting Assistant Attorney General
H
 ASHIM
M.
 
M
OOPPAN
 
Counselor to the Solicitor General
S
OPAN
J
OSHI
 
 Senior Counsel to the  Assistant Attorney General
N
ICOLE
F
RAZER
R
EAVES
 B
RINTON
L
UCAS
 
 Assistants to the Solicitor General  Department of Justice Washington, D.C. 20530-0001  SupremeCtBriefs@usdoj.gov (202) 514-2217
 
(I)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
Congress has provided that, for purposes of appor-tioning seats in the House of Representatives, the Pres-ident shall prepare “a statement showing the whole number of persons in each State * * * as ascertained under the * * * decennial census of the population.” 2 U.S.C. 2a(a). It has further provided that the Secre-tary of Commerce shall take the decennial census “in such form and content as he may determine,” 13 U.S.C. 141(a), and shall tabulate the results in a report to the President, 13 U.S.C. 141(b). The President has issued a Memorandum instructing the Secretary to include  within that report information enabling the President to implement a policy decision to exclude illegal aliens from the base population number for apportionment “to the maximum extent feasible and consistent with the discretion delegated to the executive branch.” 85 Fed. Reg. 44,679, 44,680 (July 23, 2020). At the behest of plaintiffs urging that the exclusion of illegal aliens  would unconstitutionally alter the apportionment and chill some persons from participating in the census, a three-judge district court declared the Memorandum unlawful and enjoined the Secretary from including the information in his report. The questions presented are: 1. Whether the relief entered satisfies the require-ments of Article III of the Constitution. 2. Whether the Memorandum is a permissible exer-cise of the President’s discretion under the provisions of law governing congressional apportionment.
 
(III)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
 Appendix Constitutional, statutory, and regulatory provisions ............................................................ 1a

Reward Your Curiosity

Everything you want to read.
Anytime. Anywhere. Any device.
No Commitment. Cancel anytime.
576648e32a3d8b82ca71961b7a986505