This HTML5 document contains 114 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dcthttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n15https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/
n9http://dbpedia.org/resource/File:
n22https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6354304/state-of-new-york-v-united-states-department-of-commerce/
n20https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n13https://www.leagle.com/decision/
n16http://dbpedia.org/property/concurrence/
n10https://www.oyez.org/cases/2018/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
n14https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/588/18-966/
n19http://dbpedia.org/property/joinconcurrence/
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Department_of_Commerce_v._New_York
rdf:type
dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase dbo:UnitOfWork dbo:LegalCase dbo:Case owl:Thing wikidata:Q2334719
rdfs:label
Department of Commerce v. New York
rdfs:comment
Department of Commerce v. New York, No. 18–966, 588 U.S. ___ (2019), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States dealing with the 2020 United States Census. The case revolved around the decision of the United States Census Bureau under the Trump administration to include a question asking whether respondents are United States citizens or not on the standard census questionnaire sent to all households. Such a question had been purposely omitted from this "short form" since the 1950 Census as officials and sociologists widely fear it would reduce participation in the census. It has been used on the "long form" American Community Survey sent to a subset of households and used for statistical estimation.
foaf:name
Department of Commerce, et al. v. New York, et al.
dct:subject
dbc:United_States_Constitution_Article_One_case_law dbc:Immigration_to_the_United_States dbc:United_States_Census_Bureau dbc:2019_in_United_States_case_law dbc:Trump_administration_controversies dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court
dbo:wikiPageID
59979662
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1101576480
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:S.D.N.Y. dbr:Administrative_Procedure_Act_(United_States) dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Northern_District_of_California dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbr:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbc:United_States_Constitution_Article_One_case_law dbr:2020_United_States_Census dbr:Jesse_M._Furman dbr:United_States_Census_Bureau dbr:Pretext dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_Maryland dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Second_Circuit dbr:Department_of_Commerce n9:SCOTUS_Oral_Argument._18-966._Department_of_Commerce_v._New_York.ogg dbr:Brett_Kavanaugh dbr:United_States_House_Committee_on_Oversight_and_Reform dbc:Immigration_to_the_United_States dbr:Hispanic dbr:American_Civil_Liberties_Union dbr:Barbara_Underwood dbr:Presidency_of_Donald_Trump dbr:Neil_Gorsuch dbr:New_York_(state) dbr:Enumeration_clause dbr:Kris_Kobach dbc:United_States_Census_Bureau dbr:1950_United_States_Census dbr:F._Supp._3d dbr:Thomas_B._Hofeller dbr:Steve_Bannon dbr:Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965 dbr:American_Community_Survey dbc:2019_in_United_States_case_law dbr:Gerrymandering dbr:John_Roberts dbr:United_States_Secretary_of_Commerce dbr:Richard_Seeborg dbr:Redistricting dbr:Sonia_Sotomayor dbr:George_J._Hazel dbc:Trump_administration_controversies dbr:United_States_Department_of_Justice dbr:The_New_York_Times dbr:Wilbur_Ross dbr:Executive_Order dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Southern_District_of_New_York dbr:L._Ed._2d dbr:Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:United_States_Department_of_Commerce dbr:United_States_House_of_Representatives dbr:Certiorari dbr:Certiorari_before_judgment
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n10:18-966 n13:351191470fsupp3d50233 n15:18-966_bq7c.pdf n22: n14:
owl:sameAs
wikidata:Q65121983 n20:9siUv
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Use_mdy_dates dbt:USD dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Main dbt:USArticleI dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Cite_journal dbt:Reflist
dbp:docket
18
dbp:joinmajority
unanimous ; Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh ; Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh ; Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan
dbp:opinionannouncement
n15:18-966_bq7c.pdf
dbp:oyez
n10:18-966
dbp:parallelcitations
172800.0
dbp:prior
259200.0
dbp:usvol
588
dbp:arguedate
0001-04-23
dbp:argueyear
2019
dbp:case
Department of Commerce v. New York, No. 18–966, 588 U.S. ___
dbp:decidedate
0001-06-27
dbp:decideyear
2019
dbp:fullname
Department of Commerce, et al. v. New York, et al.
dbp:holding
The Secretary of Commerce did not violate either the Enumeration Clause under the Constitution of the United States or the Census Act of 1790 by opting to reinstate a question on a person's status of citizenship to the 2020 census questionnaire, but the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York was warranted to remand the case from the judiciary to the bureaucratic agency where the evidence does not tell the same story as that of the Secretary of Commerce. Questioning the status of one's citizenship in the federal census is a reviewable action under the Administrative Procedures Act.
dbp:justia
n14:
dbp:litigants
Department of Commerce v. New York
dbp:majority
Roberts
dbp:otherSource
Supreme Court
dbp:otherUrl
n15:18-966_bq7c.pdf
dbo:abstract
Department of Commerce v. New York, No. 18–966, 588 U.S. ___ (2019), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States dealing with the 2020 United States Census. The case revolved around the decision of the United States Census Bureau under the Trump administration to include a question asking whether respondents are United States citizens or not on the standard census questionnaire sent to all households. Such a question had been purposely omitted from this "short form" since the 1950 Census as officials and sociologists widely fear it would reduce participation in the census. It has been used on the "long form" American Community Survey sent to a subset of households and used for statistical estimation. The Supreme Court case was a culmination of three separate cases decided between September 2018 and March 2019, with the earliest being heard under New York District Court Judge Jesse M. Furman. While the Census Bureau stated that the question was requested by the Justice Department to assist in enforcing the Voting Rights Act of 1965, lower courts have found that said explanation was pretextual. Additionally, many state and city officials have raised concerns that inclusion of the question would significantly depress response rates, which in turn would affect the quality of Census data, which is used, among other uses, to draw redistricting maps, which influence the results of future elections. Due to the urgency of printing the Census forms, the government expedited the case to the Supreme Court. On June 27, 2019, the Court decided that the Enumeration clause allows for a citizenship question to be added. However, it also stated that such additions can be reviewed by courts under the Administrative Procedure Act, and noted that the administration's explanation for adding the question "appears to have been contrived" and was pretextual. Unable to meet certain legal deadlines when the case was remanded to the District Court, the Trump administration announced it would issue an Executive Order to collect existing data from the Department of Commerce instead to tally immigration numbers. Furman issued a final order in July 2019 barring the administration from adding the question to the 2020 Census or delaying the Census any further.
n16:dissent
Thomas Breyer Alito
n19:dissent
Gorsuch, Kavanaugh Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Department_of_Commerce_v._New_York?oldid=1101576480&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
29812
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Department_of_Commerce_v._New_York