The 2020 U.S. census faced multiple challenges during the pandemic. A good case can be made that it should be redone — which President Trump says he will do. The problem is that Trump can be so divisive that Democrats and the media will denounce his census-retake efforts as just another partisan political ploy. 

On Aug. 7, Trump wrote on Truth Social that he had instructed the Department of Commerce (which oversees the census) to “begin work on a new and highly accurate CENSUS based on modern day facts and figures and, importantly, using the results and information gained from the Presidential Election of 2024.” One key Trump change for the new census: “People who are in our Country illegally WILL NOT BE COUNTED IN THE CENSUS.” 

Can the president conduct a mid-decade census? Apparently, although it’s never been done. Although the Census Bureau does take other surveys, current law allows the president to conduct a mid-decade census, but only for federal funding purposes, not for reapportionment of House seats.

If Trump wants to proceed with an actual recount — as opposed to a reevaluation of the 2020 count — the logistics would be extremely challenging and costly, and he may need Congress to pass enabling legislation. On the other hand, Trump is often able to move forward with his plans by keeping his detractors tied up in the courts. 

There were serious and well-recognized problems with the 2020 census. For example, The Government Accountability Office released a report in November 2024 stating, “The U.S. Census Bureau’s 2020 Post-Enumeration Survey estimated that two geographic regions and 14 states had statistically significant net coverage errors in the 2020 Census.” In addition, “The survey results also showed that under- and overcounts persisted for various demographic groups.” 

So Trump has a point. 

GAO isn’t alone. The Census Bureau also recognized the problem but emphasized the positive rather than the negative, pointing out that “counts for 36 states and the District of Columbia did not have a statistically significant undercount or overcount in the 2020 Census …” 

And here’s why Trump and Republicans might be concerned. Of the eight states with overcounts, six — Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, Delaware, Minnesota and Hawaii — are reliably blue states. Five of the six undercounted states — Texas, Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee and Florida — are reliably red states.  

Maybe it’s a coincidence, but the fact that blue states make up 75 percent of the overcount while red states make up 83 percent of the undercount seems odd — perhaps a little too odd.

There are several reasons why it’s better to be overcounted than undercounted. More federal money typically flows to states with more people. But perhaps even more important, the 435 congressional districts are divvied up based on state population. If, for example, overcounted Massachusetts and New York had been accurately counted, those states might have lost a member of the House. If the five undercounted red states had been accurately counted, they might have gained a few more congressional seats.  

In short, it’s at least possible that, had all states been accurately counted, there might be a few more Republicans and a few less Democrats in the House. And Trump might feel less pressure to initiate his redistricting efforts to hold the House. 

Trump also says that undocumented people will not be counted. That goes counter to the longstanding practice of counting everyone in the U.S. regardless of legal status. Defenders cite Article I, Section 2, of the Constitution, known as the Enumeration Clause. Then there’s the Fourteenth Amendment, which says in part, “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State …” 

Another hurdle for Trump: The U.S. Supreme Court in 2019 blocked Trump’s first effort to add a citizenship question to the census. 

But not asking about citizenship has led to several policy problems. Take health care, for example. Under federal law, undocumented workers are not allowed to enroll in Medicaid or receive federal subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. And yet they are counted as uninsured, even though they don’t have access to government-subsidized health coverage and most couldn’t afford private coverage. Counting the undocumented magnifies a problem that isn’t fixable by doing a better job of enrolling. 

Census takers should be allowed to ask about citizenship — counting the person to get that “whole number” but also noting if the person is undocumented. Critics claim that illegal immigrants will just avoid responding to the census. Perhaps some will, especially given the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement crackdowns. But counting the undocumented has been guesswork. It’s time we had as accurate a count as possible. 

Merrill Matthews is a co-author of “On the Edge: America Faces the Entitlements Cliff.”