1e0ce8e8-3138-11e9-8ad3-9a5b113ecd3c_story.html

As New York, the lead challenger, said in its brief to the court: “The enumeration affects the apportionment of representatives to Congress among the states, the allocation of electors to the electoral college, the division of congressional districts within each state, the apportionment of state and local legislative seats, and the distribution of hundreds of billions of dollars of federal funding.” ...as if New York is "suffering" from inadequate representation. Also, which households will avoid being counted? Of course, those containing illegal aliens. What harm in that? Their inclusion is causing the very problems that New York complains of...

That is hopeful news, my friend PO2 Robert M. IMHO. since the Washington Post is biased against the administration as demonstrated in the article you cited. I did some searching about a Reuters article.
I certainly hope the citizenship question will be included in the census. My parents were legal immigrants who maintained a UK citizenship throughout their lives since my birth year of 1956 until they died [1995 for my dad and 2001 for my mom].

We live in the best of times and the worst of times as Dickens stated in Tale of Two Cities. In this case it is Washington, D,C. and the White House and New York city where:
1. a freshman Congresswoman danced with joy as Amazon canceled its plan to build its east coast headquarters in Long Island
2. U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman has made efforts to state the language for the 2020 census.
"The administration has called Furman’s ruling “the first time the judiciary has ever dictated the contents of the decennial census questionnaire.”

The citizenship question seems entirely reasonable and was used until 1950.
This logical issue has been a sore point for the democrat leadership, the ACLU, New York state and California leadership as well as other liberal administrations; since they believe that including a citizenship question will scare people. They seem to view many people as deceptive and fearful about getting caught. [Of course that is focused on their support.]

"The U.S. Supreme Court will decide the fate of a fiercely contested plan by President Donald Trump’s administration to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census, agreeing on Friday to an expedited review of a judge’s ruling blocking the plan.
The justices, in a brief order, granted the administration’s request to hear its appeal of Manhattan-based U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman’s Jan. 15 ruling even before a lower appeals court has considered the matter. Oral arguments will take place in late April, with a ruling due by the end of June.

Furman’s ruling came in lawsuits brought by 18 U.S. states, 15 cities and various civil rights groups challenging the Republican administration’s decision to include the question. The plaintiffs said the question would scare immigrants and Latinos into abstaining from the census, disproportionately affecting Democratic-leaning states.
Furman ruled that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross had concealed the true motives for his “arbitrary and capricious” decision to add the citizenship question in violation of federal law.
Opponents have accused the administration of trying to engineer an undercount of the true population and diminish the electoral representation of Democratic-leaning communities in Congress, benefiting Trump’s fellow Republicans. Non-citizens comprise an estimated 7 percent of people living in the United States.

Time is of the essence in the case, as the official census forms are due to be printed in the coming months.

The U.S. Constitution mandates a census every 10 years. The official population count is used in the allocation of seats in the U.S. House of Representatives and the distribution of billions of dollars in federal funds. There has not been a census question about citizenship status since 1950.
Ross announced in March 2018 that the administration would include a citizenship question, saying the Justice Department had requested the data to help enforce the Voting Rights Act that protects eligible voters from discrimination. Only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections.
Justice Department spokeswoman Kelly Laco said the administration is pleased the justices will review its “legal and reasonable decision to reinstate a citizenship question on the 2020 census.”
Trump has pursued hardline policies to limit legal and illegal immigration. On Friday, Trump declared a national emergency in a bid to fund his promised wall along the U.S.-Mexico border without congressional approval, a step he has called necessary to combat illegal immigration.

‘LONG-LASTING EFFECTS’
New York was one of the states suing the administration. New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, said her office looks forward to defending the lower court victory at the high court, citing the “far-reaching and long-lasting effects” of a census undercount.
American Civil Liberties Union attorney Dale Ho, representing immigrant rights groups suing the administration, said adding a citizenship question would damage democracy. “The evidence presented at trial exposed this was the Trump administration’s plan from the get-go,” Ho said.

The administration has called Furman’s ruling “the first time the judiciary has ever dictated the contents of the decennial census questionnaire.”
In his ruling, Furman said the evidence showed that Ross and his aides “worked hard to generate” a request for the citizenship question from the Justice Department, and that he made the decision despite Census Bureau evidence that such a question would lead to lower response rates for the census.
The judge found a “veritable smorgasbord” of violations of a law called the Administrative Procedure Act.
Democrats call the citizenship question part of a broader Republican effort at the federal and state level, also including voter-suppression measures and redrawing of electoral districts, to diminish the voting power of areas and groups that typically back Democratic candidates, including immigrants, Latinos and African-Americans. Republicans reject the accusation.
A decision by the justices to take up a case like this one before an appeal is handled by one of the regional federal appeals courts is rare. According to the court’s rules, it takes up such requests only when the case is of “imperative public importance” warranting immediate review.
The last time it decided a case officially filed in advance of judgment by an appeals court was in 2005. That case, during the President George W. Bush’s administration, involved a challenge to criminal sentencing guidelines.
The Supreme Court rejected an earlier Trump administration request to halt the New York trial that led to Furman’s later ruling."
https://www.oann.com/u-s-top-court-to-decide-legality-of-census-citizenship-question/

FYI LTC Ivan Raiklin, Esq. Capt Seid Waddell Capt Tom Brown SFC William Farrell SSgt Robert Marx SSgt (Join to see) TSgt Joe C. SPC (Join to see) SP5 Robert Ruck SGT Michael Thorin
LTC Orlando Illi CPT Jack Durish CMSgt (Join to see) MSG Andrew White Sgt Albert Castro SSG Ray Adkins SGT Charles H. HawesCPT Gabe Snell SPC Margaret Higgins

I do agree that we need to ask this and I hope the Supreme Court agrees with that