Legislators in Tennessee and Alabama are battling to keep undocumented immigrants out of population counts used to determine congressional representation, which could change the political landscape of America and call into question long-standing constitutional interpretation. Including noncitizens reduces the voting power of citizens and gives states with sizable populations of illegal immigrants more representation. Critics point to the Constitution’s mandate that “the whole number of persons in each state” be counted, regardless of their citizenship status.
The Fight for “Citizens-Only” Representation
U.S. Senators Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) and Bill Hagerty (R-TN), along with 19 other Republican senators, have introduced the Equal Representation Act, legislation designed to prevent illegal immigrants from being counted when determining congressional districts and Electoral College votes. This legislative effort represents the latest chapter in an ongoing debate about who should be counted for the purposes of political representation. The bill’s supporters argue that including noncitizens in population counts unfairly shifts political power to states with large illegal immigrant populations at the expense of states with fewer noncitizens.
The legislative push follows previous attempts during the Trump administration to exclude unauthorized immigrants from census counts used for apportionment. That effort was ultimately abandoned following President Biden’s election. Multiple bills have since been introduced in Congress addressing this issue, including proposals from Senator Hagerty and Representatives Chuck Edwards and Warren Davidson that would ensure only American citizens are counted for congressional apportionment purposes.
The Equal Representation Act is a commonsense measure to prohibit illegal immigrants from being counted in censuses, so that sanctuary cities can’t exploit the electoral college and taxpayer resources.@SenatorHagerty with @BreitbartNews: https://t.co/PU676xXDQn pic.twitter.com/5ihrueKyST
— Heritage Action (@Heritage_Action) July 3, 2025
Constitutional Challenges and Legal Precedent
The proposal faces significant constitutional hurdles. The 14th Amendment explicitly requires counting “the whole number of persons in each state” for apportionment purposes, language that has historically been interpreted to include all residents regardless of citizenship status. Alabama previously pursued this issue through the courts, filing a lawsuit against the Census Bureau that challenged the inclusion of undocumented immigrants in population counts used for House seat apportionment. The state ultimately dropped this lawsuit after the 2020 Census results showed Alabama retained all seven of its House seats.
In states where a large share of the population cannot vote, those who do vote count more than those in states with a larger share of citizens. Counting large illegal alien populations in the census appropriates voting power from Americans and bestows it on others.” – Mo Brooks
The Supreme Court has previously weighed in on related matters. In a 2016 decision, the court supported the use of total population counts for redistricting purposes. Critics of the current system argue that including noncitizens dilutes the “one person, one vote” principle, while defenders point to both constitutional language and centuries of precedent supporting the inclusion of all residents in population counts used for apportionment.
👍 Exclusive: Sen. Bill Hagerty Leads ‘Equal Representation Act’ to Count Only Americans for Congressional Apportionment, Electoral College https://t.co/d2puytomQ6
— Jason Miller (@JasonMiller) June 30, 2025
Potential Political and Funding Impacts
If implemented, excluding unauthorized immigrants from apportionment counts could significantly alter the distribution of political power. According to research from the Pew Research Center, California, Florida, and Texas could each lose one congressional seat if unauthorized immigrants were excluded from the count. Conversely, states like Alabama, Minnesota, and Ohio would likely retain seats they might otherwise lose. This redistribution would have ripple effects throughout the political system, potentially changing the balance of power in Congress and the Electoral College.
Beyond political representation, census results influence the distribution of over $2.8 trillion annually in federal funding. Changes to how population is counted could affect funding for public services, including healthcare, education, infrastructure, and social service programs. Critics worry that excluding any population group from the count could lead to under-resourced communities, while supporters argue that federal resources should be allocated based on the citizen population.
Some Republican lawmakers have proposed even broader exclusions, suggesting that all noncitizens—including legal permanent residents (green card holders) and visa holders—should be excluded from apportionment counts. Such proposals would represent a dramatic departure from historical practice and would likely face even steeper constitutional challenges. For now, the debate continues, highlighting fundamental questions about representation, citizenship, and political power in America’s changing demographic landscape.