Wisconsin v. City of New York

Background

The dispute began when the Secretary of Commerce decided not to use a post-enumeration survey (PES) — a statistical adjustment — to correct an apparent undercount in the 1990 census. The Census Bureau and its Director had investigated the PES and some experts favored adjustment, but the Secretary concluded it should not be used. Several states and other plaintiffs sued, a district court upheld the Secretary, and the Court of Appeals applied heightened review and ordered further inquiry. The Government appealed to this Court, which granted review and heard the matter.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the Secretary’s choice had to meet a strict “one person, one vote” standard and therefore be reviewed under heightened scrutiny. The Court said no. It explained that the Constitution gives Congress broad authority over the census and that Congress in turn gave broad discretion to the Secretary. The Court applied the standard from past cases requiring that the Secretary’s decision be consistent with the constitutional goal of equal representation and be reasonably related to conducting an actual enumeration. The Secretary relied on three main findings: a preference for distributive accuracy (getting the proportions right among areas), a presumption that the unadjusted headcount was most distributively accurate absent strong evidence otherwise, and a conclusion that the PES-based adjustment would not improve distributive accuracy. The Court found these judgments reasonable and supported by some advisers and differing expert views.

Real world impact

The decision leaves the unadjusted 1990 counts in place for apportioning House seats, deciding electoral votes, allocating federal funds, and guiding state districting. It also reinforces broad deference to executive choices about census methods while noting the Bureau may continue research into future adjustments.