The US Supreme Court on Friday rejected a request by President Donald Trump's administration to halt a trial set to begin on Monday that will test the legality of the government's contentious decision to ask people taking part in the 2020 national census whether they are citizens.

The justices announced the action in a one-sentence order. Three conservative justices - Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch - said they would have granted the request for an indefinite postponement of the trial. Trump's new appointee to the nine-member court, Brett Kavanaugh, did not state publicly how he voted on the matter.

The decision benefits the 18 states challenging the census citizenship question in part because such a postponement could have made it impossible to resolve the dispute before census forms are printed starting next year.

The administration had argued there should be no trial until the justices rule on a fight over evidence. That dispute includes whether Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, whose department oversees the US Census Bureau, should be forced to answer questions under oath about his motivations for the politically charged decision.

Opponents of the citizenship question have said it would deter people in immigrant communities from participating in the census, disproportionately affecting Democratic-leaning states' electoral representation and federal funding by undercounting the number of residents.

Amy Spitalnick, a spokeswoman for New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood, who is among the state officials suing the administration, said the Trump administration has tried "every trick in the book" to block the case.

"You really have to wonder what they're trying to hide. We welcome the Supreme Court's decision and look forward to making our case in court as we fight for a full and fair census," Spitalnick said.

The US Justice Department, which is defending the administration, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The trial, in federal court in New York City, was scheduled in a pair of lawsuits. The first, spearheaded by Democratic officials, was brought by 18 states as well as a number of cities and counties. The other was filed by several immigrant rights groups that accused the administration of discrimination against non-white immigrants.

The administration, in explaining the citizenship question, has said more precise citizenship data is needed to better enforce a voting rights law in order to protect minorities.

There has not been a census question about citizenship status since 1950. The plaintiffs have said that in recent decades Census Bureau officials have opposed adding a citizenship question because of the risk of driving down response rates and undercounting the US population.

Manhattan US District Judge Jesse Furman ruled in July that the plaintiffs "plausibly allege" that Ross's decision was motivated by discrimination.

Furman ruled in September that Ross must face a deposition by lawyers for the states because his "intent and credibility are directly at issue" in the lawsuit.

The Supreme Court later blocked that order.

The US Constitution mandates a census every 10 years. It is used in the allocation of seats in Congress and the distribution of billions of dollars in federal funds.

The US Supreme Court on Friday rejected a request by President Donald Trump's administration to halt a trial set to begin on Monday that will test the legality of the government's contentious decision to ask people taking part in the 2020 national census whether they are citizens.

The US Supreme Court on Friday rejected a request by President Donald Trump's administration to halt a trial set to begin on Monday that will test the legality of the government's contentious decision to ask people taking part in the 2020 national census whether they are citizens. The justices announced the action in a one-sentence order. Three conservative justices - Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch - said they would have granted the request for an indefinite postponement of the trial. Trump's new appointee to the nine-member court, Brett Kavanaugh, did not state publicly how he voted on the matter. The decision benefits the 18 states challenging the census citizenship question in part because such a postponement could have made it impossible to resolve the dispute before census forms are printed starting next year. The administration had argued there should be no trial until the justices rule on a fight over evidence. That dispute includes whether Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, whose department oversees the US Census Bureau, should be forced to answer questions under oath about his motivations for the politically charged decision. Opponents of the citizenship question have said it would deter people in immigrant communities from participating in the census, disproportionately affecting Democratic-leaning states' electoral representation and federal funding by undercounting the number of residents. Amy Spitalnick, a spokeswoman for New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood, who is among the state officials suing the administration, said the Trump administration has tried "every trick in the book" to block the case. "You really have to wonder what they're trying to hide. We welcome the Supreme Court's decision and look forward to making our case in court as we fight for a full and fair census," Spitalnick said. The US Justice Department, which is defending the administration, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The trial, in federal court in New York City, was scheduled in a pair of lawsuits. The first, spearheaded by Democratic officials, was brought by 18 states as well as a number of cities and counties. The other was filed by several immigrant rights groups that accused the administration of discrimination against non-white immigrants. The administration, in explaining the citizenship question, has said more precise citizenship data is needed to better enforce a voting rights law in order to protect minorities. There has not been a census question about citizenship status since 1950. The plaintiffs have said that in recent decades Census Bureau officials have opposed adding a citizenship question because of the risk of driving down response rates and undercounting the US population. Manhattan US District Judge Jesse Furman ruled in July that the plaintiffs "plausibly allege" that Ross's decision was motivated by discrimination. Furman ruled in September that Ross must face a deposition by lawyers for the states because his "intent and credibility are directly at issue" in the lawsuit. The Supreme Court later blocked that order. The US Constitution mandates a census every 10 years. It is used in the allocation of seats in Congress and the distribution of billions of dollars in federal funds.

US Supreme Court won't halt trial over census citizenship question

New York's attorney general sued US&nbsp;President Donald&nbsp;Trump, three of his children and his namesake foundation on Thursday, alleging "persistently illegal conduct" at the nonprofit, including support for&nbsp;Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

Barbara Underwood, the attorney general, asked a New York state judge to dissolve the Donald J.Trump&nbsp;Foundation, and impose bans on&nbsp;Trump, his sons Donald Jr. and Eric, and his daughter Ivanka from holding leadership roles in New York charities.

Underwood said her office's 21-month investigation, begun under her predecessor Eric Schneiderman, uncovered "extensive unlawful political coordination" by the foundation withTrump's campaign, as well as "repeated and willful self-dealing" to benefit&nbsp;Trump's personal, business and political interests.

Among the transactions the lawsuit cited as illegal was a $10,000 payment to the Unicorn Children's Foundation for a portrait of&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;purchased at a fundraising auction in 2014, and $100,000 paid to another charity to settle a legal claim in 2007.

"Mr.&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;ran the Foundation according to his whim, rather than the law," the suit said.

The Republican president attacked the lawsuit in a series of posts on Twitter that blamed Democratic politicians in his home state.

"The sleazy New York Democrats, and their now disgraced (and run out of town) A.G. Eric Schneiderman, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took in $18,800,000 and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19,200,000,"&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;wrote. "I won't settle this case!"

The&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;Foundation issued a statement criticizing the lawsuit as "politics at its very worst" and accusing the attorney general of holding its $1.7 million in remaining funds "hostage for political gain."

The lawsuit adds to legal problems affecting&nbsp;Trump, including a probe by Special Counsel Robert Mueller into whether&nbsp;Trump's 2016 campaign colluded with Russia.&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;has denied there was any collusion, and Russia has denied meddling in the election.

The lawsuit filed in the state Supreme Court in Manhattan is seeking $2.8 million of restitution plus penalties, a 10-year ban on&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;serving as a director of a New York nonprofit, and one-year bans for his children.

"As our investigation reveals, the&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;Foundation was little more than a checkbook for payments from Mr.&nbsp;Trump&nbsp;or his businesses to nonprofits, regardless of their purpose of legality," Underwood said in a statement. "That is not how private foundations should function."

"The sleazy New York Democrats, and their now disgraced (and run out of town) A.G. Eric Schneiderman, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took in $18,800,000 and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19,200,000. I won’t settle this case!" Trump wrote on Twitter.

Schneiderman, the former state attorney general, resigned in May. The suit was filed by the current attorney general, Barbara Underwood, who said the foundation engaged in "extensive unlawful political coordination" with Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
The sleazy New York Democrats, and their now disgraced (and run out of town) A.G. Eric Schneiderman, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took in $18,800,000 and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19,200,000. I won’t settle this case!...
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1007278788009480192?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 14, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
....Schneiderman, who ran the Clinton campaign in New York, never had the guts to bring this ridiculous case, which lingered in their office for almost 2 years. Now he resigned his office in disgrace, and his disciples brought it when we would not settle.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1007278825661784064?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 14, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

The suit was filed by the current attorney general, Barbara Underwood, who said the foundation engaged in "extensive unlawful political coordination" with Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

New York's attorney general sued US President Donald Trump, three of his children and his namesake foundation on Thursday, alleging "persistently illegal conduct" at the nonprofit, including support for Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. Barbara Underwood, the attorney general, asked a New York state judge to dissolve the Donald J.Trump Foundation, and impose bans on Trump, his sons Donald Jr. and Eric, and his daughter Ivanka from holding leadership roles in New York charities. Underwood said her office's 21-month investigation, begun under her predecessor Eric Schneiderman, uncovered "extensive unlawful political coordination" by the foundation withTrump's campaign, as well as "repeated and willful self-dealing" to benefit Trump's personal, business and political interests. Among the transactions the lawsuit cited as illegal was a $10,000 payment to the Unicorn Children's Foundation for a portrait of Trump purchased at a fundraising auction in 2014, and $100,000 paid to another charity to settle a legal claim in 2007. "Mr. Trump ran the Foundation according to his whim, rather than the law," the suit said. The Republican president attacked the lawsuit in a series of posts on Twitter that blamed Democratic politicians in his home state. "The sleazy New York Democrats, and their now disgraced (and run out of town) A.G. Eric Schneiderman, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took in $18,800,000 and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19,200,000," Trump wrote. "I won't settle this case!" The Trump Foundation issued a statement criticizing the lawsuit as "politics at its very worst" and accusing the attorney general of holding its $1.7 million in remaining funds "hostage for political gain." The lawsuit adds to legal problems affecting Trump, including a probe by Special Counsel Robert Mueller into whether Trump's 2016 campaign colluded with Russia. Trump has denied there was any collusion, and Russia has denied meddling in the election. The lawsuit filed in the state Supreme Court in Manhattan is seeking $2.8 million of restitution plus penalties, a 10-year ban on Trump serving as a director of a New York nonprofit, and one-year bans for his children. "As our investigation reveals, the Trump Foundation was little more than a checkbook for payments from Mr. Trump or his businesses to nonprofits, regardless of their purpose of legality," Underwood said in a statement. "That is not how private foundations should function." "The sleazy New York Democrats, and their now disgraced (and run out of town) A.G. Eric Schneiderman, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took in $18,800,000 and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19,200,000. I won’t settle this case!" Trump wrote on Twitter. Schneiderman, the former state attorney general, resigned in May. The suit was filed by the current attorney general, Barbara Underwood, who said the foundation engaged in "extensive unlawful political coordination" with Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. The sleazy New York Democrats, and their now disgraced (and run out of town) A.G. Eric Schneiderman, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took in $18,800,000 and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19,200,000. I won’t settle this case!... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 14, 2018 × ....Schneiderman, who ran the Clinton campaign in New York, never had the guts to bring this ridiculous case, which lingered in their office for almost 2 years. Now he resigned his office in disgrace, and his disciples brought it when we would not settle. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 14, 2018 ×

New York sues Trump, his foundation, over illegal 'self dealing'

barbara-underwood

Barbara Underwood, News on Barbara Underwood, stories on Barbara Underwood, articles on Barbara Underwood, Barbara Underwood stories at Wion, Barbara Underwood news, Barbara Underwood latest news

barbara underwood

US Supreme Court won't halt trial over census citizenship question

New York sues Trump, his foundation, over illegal 'self dealing'