October Term 2001 · Docket 01-714
Can states block census statistical adjustments before counting ends?
Utah seeks to stop the Census Bureau from using statistical estimates. North Carolina argues challenges must wait until after the count.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Utah's counsel stated the census has historically used an actual count without statistical estimation.
North Carolina's counsel argued the right time to challenge census methods is before the census completes.
The Solicitor General noted the Census Bureau used imputation for missing data in the last five censuses.
Utah's counsel clarified the record does not show most imputations occurred in known occupied units.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-29 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 31-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 44, lines 23-37 — Transcript, file page 44, lines 23-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 7-33 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 7-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 3-5
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The dispute centers on the timing of legal challenges to census methods. Utah wants to block statistical adjustments now. North Carolina says courts should review these methods only after the census concludes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-29 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 31-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 44, lines 23-37 — Transcript, file page 44, lines 23-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 7-33 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 7-33
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 27, 2002.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 3-5
What each side wants
Utah wants to stop the Census Bureau from using statistical estimates before the count ends.
North Carolina wants to delay any legal challenge until after the census is complete.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-29 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 31-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 44, lines 23-37 — Transcript, file page 44, lines 23-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 7-33 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 7-33
What each side says
Utah argues the census must rely on an actual count without statistical estimation.
North Carolina argues the proper time to challenge census methods is after the census finishes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-29 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 31-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 44, lines 23-37 — Transcript, file page 44, lines 23-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 7-33 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 7-33
What the justices asked
How could a state challenge imputation figures before knowing they caused a problem?
Is imputation a statistical methodology or a method of making deductions from circumstantial evidence?
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 3-5
Why it matters
This case determines when states can legally challenge census statistical methods. It defines the scope of judicial review for population counting procedures. The outcome shapes the balance between statistical accuracy and constitutional counting requirements.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-29 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 31-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 44, lines 23-37 — Transcript, file page 44, lines 23-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 7-33 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 7-33
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 3-5
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-29 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 31-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 44, lines 23-37 — Transcript, file page 44, lines 23-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 7-33 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 7-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-29 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 31-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 44, lines 23-37 — Transcript, file page 44, lines 23-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 63, lines 7-33 — Transcript, file page 63, lines 7-33
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.