Department of Commerce v. New York
GPTKB entity
Statements (199)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
| gptkbp:administrative_procedure |
Challenges to administrative procedures.
|
| gptkbp:argued_on |
April 23, 2019
|
| gptkbp:arguments_against |
Potential chilling effect on participation.
|
| gptkbp:arguments_for |
Enhancing data accuracy.
|
| gptkbp:case_analysis |
Used as a case study in law schools.
Analyzed for its implications on civil rights. Analysis of the case's implications. Case study in administrative law. Implications for future census questions. |
| gptkbp:case_number |
18-966
Part of a series of cases regarding the census. 588 U. S. ___ |
| gptkbp:case_outcome |
5-4 ruling
Reversed lower court ruling. Blocked citizenship question. Impact on civil rights litigation. Impact on future census questions. Outcome affected by public sentiment. Reaffirmed the judiciary's role in checking executive power. Highlighted the importance of public trust in government. Strengthened the role of states in federal decision-making. Reaffirmed the importance of accurate census data. Emphasized the need for transparency in government actions. Reinforced the principle of non-discrimination in census. |
| gptkbp:case_significance |
Significance in the context of civil liberties.
Significant case in administrative law. Highlighted tensions between state and federal powers. |
| gptkbp:case_types |
Constitutional law case.
|
| gptkbp:citizenship_question |
Controversial addition to the census.
|
| gptkbp:civic_engagement |
encouraged civic engagement in census participation
|
| gptkbp:consequences |
Influenced future legislation regarding census and immigration.
|
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:United_States_Supreme_Court
|
| gptkbp:decided_by |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
June 27, 2019 |
| gptkbp:dissenting_opinion |
gptkb:Justice_Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg
gptkb:Justice_Samuel_Alito gptkb:Justice_Clarence_Thomas 4-5 Concern over executive overreach. |
| gptkbp:economic_policy |
Debate on public policy regarding citizenship.
Influences public policy on immigration. Sparked debates on the role of government in data collection. |
| gptkbp:effective_date |
June 27, 2019
|
| gptkbp:events |
Census Bureau proceeded without the citizenship question.
|
| gptkbp:government_response |
Governmental response to public outcry.
|
| gptkbp:has_implications_for |
future census questions
Allocation of federal funds. Civil rights and voting rights. Federal administrative procedures. Future census practices. State representation in Congress. |
| gptkbp:historical_context |
Part of ongoing debates about immigration and representation.
Part of ongoing debates about the census. |
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Department of Commerce v. New York
|
| gptkbp:impact |
immigrant communities
Census Bureau's data collection 2020 United States Census. |
| gptkbp:impact_on_federal_funding |
Affects allocation of federal funds.
|
| gptkbp:impact_on_population_count |
Potential undercount of minority populations.
|
| gptkbp:influenced_by |
gptkb:academic_research
gptkb:Civil_Rights_Movement statistical analysis advocacy groups political advocacy political climate community activism public opinion on immigration Supreme Court precedents historical census practices |
| gptkbp:involved_parties |
gptkb:State_of_New_York
gptkb:Police_Department Various states and organizations Various other states and organizations other states and organizations |
| gptkbp:involves |
census citizenship question
citizenship question |
| gptkbp:is_affected_by |
public hearings
expert testimonies |
| gptkbp:is_cited_in |
legal opinions
subsequent cases |
| gptkbp:is_debated_in |
Sparked public debate on citizenship.
|
| gptkbp:is_discussed_in |
gptkb:media
legal journals law reviews Supreme Court opinions |
| gptkbp:issues |
2010 Census
|
| gptkbp:judicial_review |
Expanded the scope of judicial review.
Judicial review of executive actions. Judicial review of executive branch actions. Judicial reasoning focused on administrative discretion. Judicial reasoning based on constitutional principles. upheld the role of judicial review |
| gptkbp:legal_context |
census data collection
Legal context of the 2020 Census. |
| gptkbp:legal_framework |
Judicial impact on future census administration.
Judicial outcome affected census practices. Judicial outcome influenced by legal arguments. Legal framework surrounding the census. Part of the legal framework governing the census. Judicial decision based on statutory interpretation. Significant victory for states challenging federal authority. |
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
gptkb:Administrative_Procedure_Act
Census citizenship question arbitrary and capricious standard administrative procedure Lack of evidence supporting the need for the question. Discriminatory impact on minority communities. Legal arguments centered on equal protection. Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. |
| gptkbp:legal_outcome |
limited executive power in census matters
reaffirmed judicial review Legal outcome influenced by public opinion. |
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
gptkb:American_Civil_Liberties_Union
gptkb:New_York_Attorney_General's_Office Department of Justice. New York Attorney General's Office. |
| gptkbp:legislation |
gptkb:Administrative_Procedure_Act
gptkb:Census_Act |
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_analysis |
examined the effects on minority communities
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_census_importance |
highlighted the importance of the census in democracy
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_cited |
Department of Commerce v. New York, 588 U. S. ___ (2019)
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_context |
context of immigration and representation
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_critique |
criticized the rationale provided by the government
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_dissent_context |
context of dissenting opinions
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_effect_on_states |
affected state funding and representation
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_future_implications |
set a precedent for future administrative actions
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_historical_context |
historical context of census questions
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_implications |
influences future census methodologies
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_judicial_authority |
asserted the authority of the judiciary over executive actions
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_judicial_philosophy |
reflected a conservative judicial philosophy
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_judicial_reasoning |
utilized principles of administrative law
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_legal_basis |
based on constitutional principles
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_legal_consequences |
imposed legal consequences on the Department of Commerce
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_legal_framework |
established a legal framework for evaluating agency actions
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_legal_interpretation |
interpreted the Administrative Procedure Act broadly
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_legal_precedent |
referenced previous census-related cases
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_outcome |
resulted in a significant legal precedent
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_public_policy |
addressed public policy concerns
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_public_trust |
addressed issues of public trust in government.
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_reasoning |
lack of evidence for citizenship question
|
| gptkbp:majority_opinion_statements |
emphasized the importance of accurate census data
|
| gptkbp:media_coverage |
Extensive media coverage.
Extensive coverage in national media. |
| gptkbp:outcome |
ruled against the addition of the citizenship question
The Supreme Court blocked the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census. struck down the addition of a citizenship question |
| gptkbp:policy_implications |
Implications for immigration policy.
|
| gptkbp:political_impact |
Impact on government policy.
Influences congressional representation. |
| gptkbp:precedent |
Set a precedent for future administrative law cases.
Impact on future census-related litigation. affects future census-related litigation Set a precedent regarding administrative decision-making and the census. Established legal precedent for census-related litigation. affects future census practices |
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Chief_Justice_John_Roberts
gptkb:Justice_John_Roberts gptkb:Justice_Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg 5-4 affects representation in Congress decision was arbitrary and capricious rationality of the decision Questioning the rationale for the citizenship question. |
| gptkbp:public_policy_impact |
Influenced public policy discussions on immigration.
|
| gptkbp:public_reaction |
Controversial and widely debated.
Widespread public opposition. sparked public debate on immigration and representation |
| gptkbp:related_cases |
gptkb:United_States_v._New_York
gptkb:National_Federation_of_Independent_Business_v._Sebelius gptkb:City_of_San_Jose_v._Trump gptkb:National_Urban_League_v._Ross Department of Commerce v. New York, 2018 Illinois v. Ross. National Urban League v. Ross. New York v. U. S. Department of Commerce. |
| gptkbp:related_to |
gptkb:U._S._Census_Bureau
gptkb:federal_government public policy voting rights government accountability judicial review civil liberties administrative law representation in Congress demographic data executive branch authority state rights census accuracy |
| gptkbp:scholarly_analysis |
Analyzed in legal and political science literature.
Examined implications for democracy and representation. |
| gptkbp:significance |
impact on the 2020 Census
upheld principles of administrative law Impact on future census processes. Significance in administrative law. affirms limits on executive power Addressed administrative law and the scope of executive power. |
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg
|
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
3
|