NY AG's Lawsuit Over Census Citizenship Question Set for Trial Over White House's Objection
Lawyers for the Trump administration had asked Furman late Friday to pause discovery while they ask the Supreme Court to review a decision allowing extra-record discovery in the case.
October 01, 2018 at 12:02 PM
5 minute read
New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood's lawsuit against the Trump administration over a question about citizenship on the 2020 U.S. census will go to trial next month, according to an order issued Sunday by a federal judge.
The order, signed by Judge Jesse Furman of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, allows discovery to proceed over objections from the federal government.
Furman said in the order that he was unconvinced by arguments advanced by lawyers for the Trump administration that the litigation should be resolved at the summary judgment stage. He said there are facts in dispute that need to be resolved at trial.
“Given the foregoing, the Court believes that it would be far more efficient—and more consistent with Defendants' own interest in a speedy resolution of the claims in this case—to proceed directly to trial and that Defendants would be far better off devoting their time and resources to preparing their pre-trial materials than to preparing summary judgment papers,” Furman wrote.
The Trump administration still has the option of filing a motion for summary judgment later this month, before trial begins.
His order on Sunday came after attorneys for the U.S. Department of Justice opposed going to trial during a court appearance last month. Furman gave them an opportunity to file a brief explaining why the case should be decided on summary judgment, while Underwood's office advocated for a trial. Furman sided with the latter.
Furman also denied a request from the Trump administration to stay all discovery in the lawsuit, including a deposition of Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, who Underwood's office is scheduled to depose next week. They suspect his testimony will help get to the heart of how and when his agency decided they would ask about an individual's immigration status on the next census.
The Department of Commerce declined to comment on either decision. A spokeswoman for Underwood said the case will move forward as planned.
“We welcome the decision and look forward to continuing to move our case forward to ensure a full and fair census,” said Amy Spitalnick, spokeswoman for Underwood.
Lawyers for the Trump administration had asked Furman late Friday to pause discovery while they ask the Supreme Court to review a decision by the Second Circuit denying their petition for a writ of mandamus. They were asking the appeals court to review a July decision from Furman that allowed extra-record discovery in the case. The Second Circuit denied their petition last week.
Furman had strong words for the Trump administration in his decision late Sunday, calling their request to stay all discovery “outrageous.”
“To the extent that Defendants request a stay of all discovery, their application is particularly frivolous—if not outrageous—given their inexplicable (and still unexplained) two-month delay in seeking that relief,” Furman wrote.
He was referencing the administration's first request to stay all discovery at the end of August—two months after it began in early July. He denied that request and said Sunday that the new demand was “even more far-fetched now than it was when first requested.”
“The application—which does not even bother to recite the requirements for a stay, let alone attempt to show that those requirements have been met—is hard to understand as anything more than a pro forma boxchecking exercise for purposes of seeking relief in the Supreme Court,” Furman wrote.
Beyond his rejection that the Trump administration will suffer irreparable harm, Furman also said he wasn't going to approve a stay when there are only nine scheduled business left before discovery ends in the case on Oct. 12. He said he “will not look kindly on any delay” in discovery unless a higher court permits it.
Furman has set a trial date for Nov. 5 in the lawsuit, which Underwood's office is leading with attorneys general from 17 other states.
They have argued that asking about a person's immigration status could suppress turnout in the census in states with a large number of immigrants, like New York. A lower turnout could reduce the number of representatives in Congress and the Electoral College that those states are allowed. It could also reduce the amount of federal funding those states receive in areas like education of health care, the attorneys general said.
Senior Trial Counsel Elena Goldstein and Executive Deputy Attorney General Matthew Colangelo are leading the case for New York. Kate Bailey is the lead attorney for the Trump administration.
The parties are scheduled to hold a status conference in the case on Oct. 17, two days before the deadline for the Trump administration to file for summary judgment.
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNew York Court of Appeals Blocks Trump Attempt to Stay Friday Sentencing
Balancing Judicial Authority: Understanding Sanctions, Severance, and Interferences
8 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Here's What Corporate Litigators Expect Del. Courts to Address in 2025
- 2U.S. Supreme Court Has No Jurisdiction Over Trump's New York Criminal Case: Prosecutors
- 3The Law Firm Disrupted: With KPMG's Proposed Entry, Arizona's Liberalized Legal Market is Getting Interesting
- 4Womble Bond Dickinson Adds New Leaders as Merger Is Completed
- 5Family's Disability Discrimination Suit Cleared to Go Forward Against Six Flags
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250