Trump v. New York
The Court vacated the District Court's ruling that had blocked a presidential memo directing the Commerce Department to report estimated counts of illegal immigrants in each state for congressional apportionment purposes.· AI-written
141 S. Ct. 530 · No. 20-366 · 2020 term · Roberts Court
Decided Dec 18, 2020 · argued Nov 30, 2020
Judicial power · Standing to sue: miscellaneous
The voteMajorityDissent
6–36 in the majority, 3 in dissent
3 dissents (6–3)
Vacated and remanded. Trump won.
What this ruling means
Vacated and remanded: the Supreme Court set aside the decision of the New York Southern U.S. District Court, wiping it out without necessarily saying the result was wrong, and sent the case back for that court to decide again under the right legal standard.
Trump was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Won” means the Court gave that side the result it asked for.
From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.
Summary
The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.
Trump v. New York, 592 U.S. 125 (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the 2020 United States census. It centered on the validity of a July 2020 executive memorandum from President Donald Trump to the Department of Commerce, which conducts and reports the census. The memo ordered the department to report the estimated counts of illegal immigrants in each state, allowing the president to exclude them for purposes of congressional apportionment. The memo was challenged by a coalition of U.S. states led by New York along with several cities and other organizations suing to block action on the memo. The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York found for the states and blocked enforcement of the memo, leading Trump to seek emergency relief asking the Supreme Court to rule on the matter before the results of the census were due on December 31, 2020. The Court issued a per curiam decision on December 18, 2020, vacating the District Court's ruling and dismissing the case because lack of standing and ripeness made the case premature. The same decision was reached by the court on December 18, 2020, for the similar Trump v. Useche case.
While multiple states vowed to bring the case back to the Supreme Court immediately after the required census results were reported, thereby establishing standing and ripeness, the Trump Administration struggled immensely with implementation (due in part to the Supreme Court case Department of Commerce v. New York). Ultimately, Trump's successor after the 2020 election, Joe Biden, issued Executive Order 13986 which required non-citizens to be counted in the 2020 Census, both for the purposes of enumeration and determining congressional apportionment, thereby reversing the order issued by the Trump administration and ending the controversy.
Data notes
The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.
How the justices voted
Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 2020 term. Filled: the 6 in the majority. Hollow: the 3 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.
Majority(6)
John RobertsJoined the majority
Brett KavanaughJoined the majority
Amy BarrettJoined the majority
Neil GorsuchJoined the majority
Samuel AlitoJoined the majority
Clarence ThomasJoined the majority
Dissent(3)
Stephen BreyerWrote a dissent
Sonia SotomayorJoined a dissent
Elena KaganJoined a dissent
Data notes
Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.
Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.
The parties
Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.
- Petitioner
- TrumpGovernmental official, or an official of an agency established under an interstate compact (United States)
- Respondent
- New YorkState (New York)
- Reached the Court by
- Appeal (the Court was required to hear it)
Data notes
The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.
The law at issue
The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.
- Provision
- Article III, Section 2, Paragraph 1 (case or controversy requirement)
- Kind of law
- Constitution
- Decided by
- Judicial review (national level)
Data notes
The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.
Timeline
What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.
- Dec 18, 2020DecidedDecided · Decided 6–3: vacated and remanded. Trump won.
- Nov 30, 2020ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
- Not datedTaken upTaken up · Reached the Supreme Court on appeal, which the Court had to hear.
- Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Began in and was decided by the New York Southern U.S. District Court.
Data notes
From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.
Other decisions on the same issue
6 other argued cases since 1946 on standing to sue: miscellaneous, newest first.
- Department of Education v. Brown600 U.S. 551Jun 30, 2023 · 600 U.S. 551Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
- United States v. Texas599 U.S. 670Jun 23, 2023 · 599 U.S. 670Judicial power8–18–1 band
- California v. Texas141 S. Ct. 2104Jun 17, 2021 · 141 S. Ct. 2104Judicial power7–27–2 band
- Town of Chester v. Laroe Estates137 S. Ct. 1645Jun 5, 2017 · 137 S. Ct. 1645Judicial power9–0Unanimous band
- Janet Reno, Attorney General, et al. v. Catholic Social Services, Inc., et al.509 U.S. 43Jun 18, 1993 · 509 U.S. 43Judicial power6–36–3 band
- Brownell, Attorney General, Successor to the Alien Property Custodian, v. Chase National Bank of New York, Trustee, et al.352 U.S. 36Nov 19, 1956 · 352 U.S. 36Judicial power7–0Unanimous band
Data notes
Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.
Official record
Read the argument audio on Oyez and Wikipedia. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.