You are viewing an archived webpage. The information on this page may be out of date. Learn about EPIC's recent work at epic.org.

The Census and Privacy

Top News

  • Supreme Court Won’t Review Deeply Flawed Ruling in EPIC v. Commerce : The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to review a deeply flawed ruling in EPIC v. Commerce, EPIC's suit to halt the collection of citizenship data in the 2020 Census due to the government's failure to complete required privacy impact assessments. Under the E-Government Act, federal agencies must make privacy impact assessments "publicly available" before undertaking a new collection of personal data. Yet a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit ruled that the statute does not "vest a general right of information in the public" that would allow EPIC—one of the leading privacy organizations in the country—to obtain information about the government's data collection practices. Last year, the Supreme Court's decision in Commerce v. New York led to the removal of the citizenship question from the 2020 Census. EPIC filed an amicus brief in support of that outcome. (Apr. 27, 2020)
  • EPIC Seeks Information about Secretary Ross’s Decision to Delay Census Data Reporting: EPIC sent an urgent Freedom of Information Act request to the Commerce Department today, seeking records about Secretary Wilbur Ross's decision to delay the 2020 Census reporting deadlines. In a statement this week Commerce Secretary Ross and the Census Bureau Director asked Congress for a four-month delay to "deliver final apportionment counts" that would be used in congressional redistricting. Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, Chair of the House Oversight Committee, said that the administration is "stonewalling in providing information" that is "vital in assessing" the proposed extension. In a 2018 letter to Congress, EPIC said "the Census is an essential part of understanding the changing demographics in America. The census helps ensure evidence-based policy decisions and census data is the source of much political and economic planning in the United States." (Apr. 14, 2020)

    • More top news

  • EPIC Celebrates Sunshine Week with 2020 FOIA Gallery + (Mar. 16, 2020)
    In celebration of Sunshine Week, EPIC has unveiled the 2020 FOIA Gallery. Since 2001, EPIC has annually published highlights of EPIC's most significant open government cases. For example, last year EPIC filed the first lawsuit in the country for the public release of the Mueller Report. The federal court rebuked Attorney General Barr and agreed to review the complete Mueller Report to determine what additional material must be released. EPIC also prevailed in EPIC v. the Commission on AI. A federal court ruled that the Commission on Artificial Intelligence is subject to the FOIA. Following the court's decision, the AI Commission released documents about its activities to EPIC. In this year's FOIA gallery, EPIC also highlighted pre-trial risk assessment reports, documents about Justice Kavanaugh's role in the warrantless surveillance program, a DHS drone status report, the Census data transfer plan, and more than 29,000 complaints against Facebook pending at the FTC.
  • EPIC to Congress: Suspend DHS Data Transfer to Census Bureau + (Jan. 8, 2020)
    In a statement to Congress, EPIC warned that the proposed transfer of DHS data to the Census Bureau would violate the federal Privacy Act. The data include personal information about citizens, immigrants, and foreign nationals. EPIC urged the Committee to "block DHS from carrying out this proposed data transfer pending further review." EPIC previously warned the House Oversight Committee that President Trump's Executive Order on collecting citizenship data could undermine Privacy Act safeguards. EPIC opposed the citizenship question in the 2020 Census, arguing that the Bureau failed to complete required privacy impact assessments. EPIC also filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case warning that collecting citizenship information presents "enormous privacy and security concerns." The Supreme Court found the rational for adding the citizen question "contrived" and the question was withdrawn.
  • DHS Seeks to Transfer Personal Data to Census Bureau in Violation of Privacy Act + (Jan. 7, 2020)
    The Department of Homeland Security has announced a plan to transfer detailed personal data collected from immigrants to the Census Bureau—an apparent violation of the Privacy Act. In a privacy impact assessment, published over the holiday break, the DHS revealed that it would provide names, addresses, social security numbers, and other highly sensitive data to the Census Bureau. Yet the DHS admitted that individuals weren't aware their personal data would be obtained by the Census Bureau, that the data may be inaccurate, or used for purposes unrelated to the census survey. The proposed data transfer follows a July executive order by President Trump, who vowed that the government "will leave no stone unturned" when seeking citizenship information from every person in the United States. EPIC previously warned Congress that the executive order could undermine Privacy Act safeguards. In EPIC v. Commerce, EPIC challenged the failure of the Census Bureau to conduct privacy impact assessments before adding the (later withdrawn) citizenship question to the 2020 Census.
  • EPIC Petitions Supreme Court to Obtain Privacy Impact Assessments from Census Bureau + (Dec. 16, 2019)
    Today EPIC petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review the D.C. Circuit decision in EPIC v. Commerce, which denied EPIC the right to obtain privacy impact assessments that the Census Bureau was required to publish before adding the citizenship question to the 2020 Census. EPIC told the Court that the lower court decision conflicts with earlier Supreme Court opinions and creates obstacles to public access to privacy impact assessments that Congress never intended. EPIC warned the Court that the decision makes the impact assessment obligation "essentially unenforceable." Earlier this year, the Supreme Court's decision in Commerce v. New York led to the removal of the citizenship question from the 2020 Census. EPIC filed an amicus brief in support of that outcome.
  • EPIC Seeks Documents About Executive Order on Citizenship Status Data Collection + (Jul. 31, 2019)
    EPIC has filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Department of Commerce seeking documents about Executive Order 13,880, "Collecting Information About Citizenship Status in Connection With the Decennial Census." The executive order requires federal agencies across the government to transfer personal data, subject to Privacy Act safeguards, to the Department of Commerce to determine citizenship "status." Trump also ordered the Commerce Department to develop mechanisms for expanding the collection of data, including collecting data from state governments. Trump vowed that the government "will leave no stone unturned" when seeking citizenship information from every person living in the United States. EPIC recently sent a statement to Congress, warning that the executive order could undermine Privacy Act safeguards. EPIC opposed a similar effort by the Privacy Advisory Commission on Election Integrity to gather personal data from the states. The program was eventually suspended, the data deleted, and the Commission disbanded.
  • EPIC to Congress: Executive Order on Citizenship Status Threatens Privacy + (Jul. 23, 2019)
    EPIC has sent a statement to Congress, warning that President Trump's Executive Order on Collecting Information about Citizenship Status could undermine Privacy Act safeguards. EPIC said "Although President Trump has abandoned his quest to seek citizenship information through the 2020 Census, the plan to aggregate data from other agencies in the Commerce Department is also problematic." EPIC explained that the "Executive Order contemplates both the collection of statistical data and the use of citizenship data for determinations about individuals." EPIC opposed the citizenship question in the 2020 Census, arguing in federal court that the Census Bureau failed to complete required privacy impact assessments. EPIC also filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case, joined by 23 legal scholars and technical experts, warning that "collecting citizenship status information from hundreds of millions of U.S. residents presents enormous privacy and security concerns."
  • Trump Issues Executive Order To Seek Citizenship Information From All Federal Agencies + (Jul. 11, 2019)
    President Trump announced today that he will order federal agencies to transfer personal data to the Department of Commerce to determine the number of non-citizens in the United States. Trump stated, "We will utilize these vast federal databases to gain a full, complete, and accurate count of the non-citizen population including databases maintained by the Department of Homeland Security, and the Social Security Administration." President Trump has abandoned his quest to seek citizenship information on the 2020 Census after the Supreme Court ruled that the Commerce Department's decision to collect citizenship data "cannot be adequately explained" by the rationale provided by the agency. EPIC separately sought to block the Census Bureau's collection of citizenship data because the agency failed to complete required privacy impact assessments. Last month, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision in the case, ruling that EPIC did not have a legal basis to obtain Privacy Impact Assessments from the federal government. EPIC also filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case, joined by 23 legal scholars and technical experts, warning that "collecting citizenship status information from hundreds of millions of U.S. residents presents enormous privacy and security concerns." The federal Privacy Act also imposes limits on the ability of federal agencies to transfer personal data to other agencies. The DHS has previously stated that DACA applicant information would be used exclusively for the purposes for which it was provided.
  • BREAKING: Citizenship Question Dropped from 2020 Census + (Jul. 2, 2019)
    The Census Bureau has confirmed that it will not collect personal data concerning citizenship status on the 2020 Census. The Bureau has instead ordered census forms to be printed without the proposed citizenship question. The decision follows a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court blocking the citizenship question over the government's failure to provide a "reasoned explanation" for collecting citizenship information. EPIC filed a separate lawsuit to block the Census Bureau's collection of citizenship data because the agency had failed to complete required privacy impact assessments. The D.C. Circuit reached a decision in EPIC's case last week. EPIC also filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case, joined by 23 legal scholars and technical experts, warning that "collecting citizenship status information from hundreds of millions of U.S. residents presents enormous privacy and security concerns."
  • EPIC v. Commerce: D.C. Circuit Rules Privacy Impact Assessments Not Available to the Public + (Jun. 29, 2019)
    The D.C. Circuit has issued a decision in EPIC v. Commerce, EPIC’s suit to halt the collection of citizenship data in the 2020 Census over the government’s failure to complete required Privacy Impact Assessments. Under the E-Government Act, federal agencies must make Privacy Impact Assessments “publicly available” before undertaking a new collection of personal data. Yet the D.C. Circuit ruled that the statute does not “vest a general right of information in the public” that would allow parties to obtain information about the government’s data collection practices. The court acknowledged that EPIC can sue on behalf of its members, but concluded that one of the leading privacy organizations in the country did not have a legal basis to obtain Privacy Impact Assessments from the federal government. EPIC may appeal the decision.
  • Supreme Court Blocks Census Citizenship Question + (Jun. 27, 2019)
    The U.S. Supreme Court has blocked the citizenship question from inclusion on the 2020 Census, upholding the result reached in a lower court. The Court ruled that the Commerce Department's decision to collect citizenship data "cannot be adequately explained" by the rationale provided by the agency. "Altogether, the evidence tells a story that does not match the explanation the Secretary gave for his decision," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. Although the Court gave the Commerce Department a second chance to provide a "reasoned explanation" for the citizenship question, the government has said that it must begin printing forms by July 1—four days from now. EPIC is separately seeking to block the Census Bureau's collection of citizenship data because the agency has failed to complete required privacy impact assessments. A decision is expected soon from the D.C. Circuit. EPIC's case is EPIC v. Commerce, No. 19-5031 (D.C. Cir). EPIC also filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case, joined by 23 legal scholars and technical experts, warning that "collecting citizenship status information from hundreds of millions of U.S. residents presents enormous privacy and security concerns." EPIC said further "in failing to assess the risks that would result from the collection of personal data regarding citizenship status, the Census Bureau has violated its obligations under the E-Government Act."
  • EPIC Argues Against Collection of Citizenship Data in Federal Appeals Court + (May. 7, 2019)
    EPIC Counsel John Davisson will argue before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Wednesday morning to block the Census Bureau from collecting personal data concerning citizenship status in the 2020 Census. The argument will begin around 10:00 a.m. ET and can be live streamed here. EPIC's case challenges the Census Bureau's failure to complete privacy impact assessments required by law. The Bureau concedes that it must complete the impact assessments but has so far failed to do so. As EPIC previously warned the appeals court, "major privacy risks have not been addressed by the agency." EPIC has filed several successful lawsuits to require privacy impact assessments by federal agencies, including EPIC's case that led a now-defunct Presidential Commission to delete state voter data it unlawfully obtained. EPIC's census privacy case is EPIC v. Commerce, No. 19-5031 (D.C. Cir.).
  • EPIC to Appropriations Committees: Suspend the Census Citizenship Question + (Apr. 29, 2019)
    EPIC has sent a statement to the House Appropriations Committee prior to a hearing on Census oversight. EPIC urged Congress to require the Census Bureau to remove the citizenship question from the 2020 census, pending the completion and review of required Privacy Impact Assessments. EPIC told the Committee that the Census Bureau failed to complete the Privacy Impact Assessments required by Section 208 of the E-Government Act. The Census Bureau concedes that it must complete the impact assessments but has so far failed to do so. "Congress made clear that data collection simply could not occur without the completion of these assessments," EPIC explained to Congress. In EPIC v. Commerce, currently before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, EPIC argued that the collection of personal data concerning citizenship status without the privacy impact assessments is unlawful. EPIC warned the federal appeals court that "major privacy risks have not been addressed by the agency."
  • EPIC FOIA: Census Bureau Gathers Noncitizens' Data Without Required Privacy Impact Assessment + (Apr. 23, 2019)
    An EPIC Freedom of Information Act request has revealed that the Census Bureau obtains vast quantities of noncitizens' personal data from the Department of Homeland Security without having first conducted a required Privacy Impact Assessment. Under a written agreement disclosed to EPIC, the DHS transfers the "Legal Permanent Resident File" to the Bureau each year, which includes citizenship, immigration status, marital status, and other sensitive personal information. Yet the Census Bureau conducted no analysis of the privacy risks and failed to describe the personal data gathered. In EPIC v. Commerce, EPIC has charged that the Census Bureau failed to complete required Privacy Impact Assessments prior to adding the citizenship question to the 2020 Census. The Bureau concedes that it must complete the impact assessments but has so far failed to do so. EPIC's motion to halt the citizenship question will be argued before the D.C. Circuit on May 8.
  • Supreme Court to Hear Arguments on Census Citizenship Question + (Apr. 22, 2019)
    The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments this week in a case challenging the addition of the citizenship question to the 2020 Census. EPIC filed an amicus brief in Department of Commerce v. New York, urging the Court to uphold a New York federal judge's decision to remove the question. EPIC warned that the "extraordinary reach of the Bureau into the private lives of Americans brings extraordinary risks to privacy." In a related matter, EPIC's lawsuit to block the citizenship question, EPIC v. Commerce, is currently before the D.C. Circuit with an argument scheduled for May 8. EPIC has charged that the Census Bureau failed to complete required Privacy Impact Assessments prior to the decisions to collect personal data about citizenship. The Bureau concedes that it must complete the impact assessments but has so far failed to do so. EPIC told the D.C. Circuit, "Key deadlines are fast approaching, and major privacy risks have not been addressed by the agency."
  • EPIC to Appropriations Committees: Suspend the Census Citizenship Question + (Apr. 3, 2019)
    EPIC has sent a statement to the House and Senate regarding the FY2020 appropriations for the Department of Commerce. EPIC urged Congress to require the Census Bureau to remove the citizenship question from the 2020 census, pending the completion of legally required Privacy Impact Assessments. EPIC told the committees that the Census Bureau failed to complete the Privacy Impact Assessments required by Section 208 of the E-Government Act. The Census Bureau concedes that it must complete the impact assessments but has so far failed to do so. "Congress made clear that data collection simply could not occur without the completion of these assessments," EPIC explained to Congress. In EPIC v. Commerce now before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, EPIC argued that the collection of citizenship data without the privacy impact assessments is unlawful. EPIC warned the federal appeals court that, "major privacy risks have not been addressed by the agency."
  • In Amicus Brief, EPIC Urges Supreme Court to Remove Census Citizenship Question + (Apr. 1, 2019)
    EPIC filed an amicus brief in Department of Commerce v. New York, urging the Supreme Court to uphold a New York federal judge’s decision to remove the citizenship question from the 2020 Census. EPIC warned that “collecting citizenship status information from hundreds of millions of U.S. residents presents enormous privacy and security concerns.” EPIC described the history of census privacy, including EPIC’s 2004 FOIA lawsuit which revealed that the Census Bureau transferred data on Arab-Americans to the DHS after 9/11. EPIC also explained that, “in failing to assess the risks that would result from the collection of personal data regarding citizenship status, the Census Bureau has violated its obligations under the E-Government Act." In a related matter, EPIC’s lawsuit to block the citizenship question, EPIC v. Commerce, is currently before the D.C. Circuit with an argument scheduled for May 8. EPIC has charged that the Census Bureau failed to complete required Privacy Impact Assessments prior to the decisions to collect personal data about citizenship. The Bureau concedes that it must complete the impact assessments but has so far failed to do so.
  • EPIC to Congress: Suspend the Census Citizenship Question + (Mar. 13, 2019)
    In advance of a hearing on the 2020 Census, EPIC has sent a statement to the House Oversight Committee urging Congress to require the Census Bureau to remove the citizenship question from the 2020 census. EPIC told the Committee that the Census Bureau failed to complete privacy impact assessments required by law. "Congress made clear that data collection simply could not occur without the completion of these assessments" EPIC explained. In EPIC v. Commerce, a case now before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, EPIC recently filed an opening brief to block the Census Bureau from collecting citizenship data in the 2020 Census. The Bureau concedes that it must complete the impact assessments but has so far failed to do so. EPIC warned the federal appeals court that "major privacy risks have not been addressed by the agency."
  • EPIC Investigates the Transfer of Personal Data from DHS to Census Bureau + (Mar. 8, 2019)
    EPIC has submitted urgent Freedom of Information Act requests to the Department of Homeland Security (USCIS and the Office of Immigration Statistics) and the Census Bureau for records about the planned transfer of personal data from DHS to the Census Bureau. After a federal judge in California ruled that adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census was unconstitutional, the AP reported that DHS would disclose to the Census Bureau personal data, including names, addresses, birth dates, Social Security numbers, and alien registration numbers. The Census Bureau confirmed that the agency was preparing an agreement with DHS to “receive administrative records.” In EPIC v. Commerce, EPIC alleges that the Bureau failed to conduct and publish required privacy impact assessments before making an uninformed decision to collect citizenship data. EPIC is seeking an injunction from the D.C. Circuit, which will hear arguments in the case in May. EPIC's appeal is EPIC v. Commerce, No. 19-5031 (D.C. Cir.).
  • Second Court Blocks Census Citizenship Question + (Mar. 6, 2019)
    A federal court in California has blocked the Census Bureau from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census, becoming the second court to do so. The court found that the Bureau made an arbitrary decision to include the citizenship question, then engaged in a "cynical search to find some reason, any reason" to "justify that preordained result." A federal court in New York recently blocked the citizenship question in a different case, but the Supreme Court is set to review that decision. In EPIC v. Commerce, EPIC alleges that the Bureau failed to conduct and publish required privacy impact assessments before making an uninformed decision to collect citizenship data. EPIC is seeking an injunction from the D.C. Circuit, which will hear arguments in the case in May. EPIC's appeal is EPIC v. Commerce, No. 19-5031 (D.C. Cir.).
  • EPIC Files Opening Brief in Appeal to Block Census Citizenship Question + (Mar. 2, 2019)
    EPIC has filed an opening brief in the appeal to block the Census Bureau from collecting citizenship data in the 2020 Census. EPIC told the D.C. Circuit that the Census Bureau failed to complete privacy impact assessments required by law. “This uninformed data collection by a federal agency is precisely what the E-Government Act prohibits,” EPIC explained. The Bureau concedes that it must complete the impact assessments but has so far failed to do so. EPIC warned the federal appeals court that “major privacy risks have not been addressed by the agency.” EPIC has filed numerous successful lawsuits to require privacy impact assessments, including EPIC's case that led a now-defunct Presidential Commission to delete state voter data it unlawfully obtained. EPIC's appeal is EPIC v. Commerce, No. 19-5031 (D.C. Cir.).
  • Arguments Set for EPIC Appeal to Block Census Citizenship Question + (Feb. 26, 2019)
    The D.C. Circuit has scheduled oral argument for May in EPIC's expedited appeal to block the Census Bureau from collecting citizenship information in the 2020 Census. EPIC alleges that the Bureau failed to complete privacy impact assessments required by the E-Government Act before adding the question. A lower court denied EPIC's motion for a preliminary injunction, agreeing that the Bureau is required to conduct the detailed assessments, but oddly concluding that it is not required to do so "until the Bureau mails its first batch of Census questionnaires to the public"—a view entirely at odds with the relevant law. A federal court in New York recently blocked the citizenship question in a different case, but the Supreme Court will now review that decision. EPIC has filed numerous successful lawsuits to require privacy impact assessments, including EPIC's case that led a now-defunct Presidential Commission to delete state voter data it unlawfully obtained. EPIC's appeal is EPIC v. Commerce, No. 19-5031 (D.C. Cir.).
  • EPIC Seeks Early Argument in Appeal to Block Census Citizenship Question + (Feb. 21, 2019)
    EPIC has asked the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to hold oral argument by April in EPIC v. Commerce, EPIC's expedited appeal to block the Census Bureau from collecting citizenship information in the 2020 Census. EPIC alleges that the Bureau failed to complete privacy impact assessments required by the E-Government Act before adding the question. A lower court denied EPIC's motion for a preliminary injunction, agreeing that the Bureau is required to conduct the detailed assessments, but oddly concluding that it is not required to do so "until the Bureau mails its first batch of Census questionnaires to the public"—a view entirely at odds with the relevant law. A federal court in New York recently blocked the citizenship question in a different case, but the Supreme Court will now review that decision. EPIC has filed numerous successful lawsuits to require privacy impact assessments, including EPIC's case that led a now-defunct Presidential Commission to delete state voter data it unlawfully obtained. EPIC's appeal is captioned EPIC v. Commerce, No. 19-5031 (D.C. Cir.).
  • Supreme Court to Hear Dispute over Census Citizenship Question + (Feb. 15, 2019)
    The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the government's appeal of New York v. Department of Commerce, in which a New York federal judge blocked the government from asking a citizenship question on the 2020 Census. EPIC filed an amicus brief in the case. EPIC has also sued to block the citizenship question in EPIC v. Commerce. EPIC alleges that the Bureau failed to complete privacy impact assessments before adding the question. A lower court held that the Bureau must "prepare PIAs that adequately address the collection of citizenship data in the 2020 Census," but denied a preliminary injunction. EPIC has appealed the decision.
  • EPIC Files Appeal to Block Census Citizenship Question + (Feb. 12, 2019)
    EPIC has filed an expedited appeal in EPIC v. Commerce to block the Census Bureau from collecting citizenship information in the 2020 Census. EPIC alleged that the Bureau failed to complete privacy impact assessments before adding the citizenship question. A lower court held that the Bureau must "prepare PIAs that adequately address the collection of citizenship data in the 2020 Census" and the Bureau conceded it would complete the assessments by March. But the lower court denied EPIC's motion for a preliminary injunction, concluding that the Census Bureau is not required to conduct a privacy assessment "until the Bureau mails its first batch of Census questionnaires to the public," a view entirely at odds with the E-Government Act. EPIC has filed numerous successful lawsuits to require privacy impact assessments, including EPIC's case that led a now-defunct Presidential Commission to delete state voter data it unlawfully obtained. EPIC's case in the lower court is captioned EPIC v. Commerce, No. 18-2711 (D.D.C.).
  • Court Denies Injunction in EPIC Census Privacy Suit + (Feb. 8, 2019)
    A federal court has denied EPIC’s motion for a preliminary injunction and refused to block the Census Bureau from collecting citizenship information via the 2020 Census. As EPIC told the court, the Bureau unlawfully failed to complete multiple privacy impact assessments before it abruptly introduced the citizenship question last year. The court acknowledged that the Bureau must “prepare PIAs that adequately address the collection of citizenship data in the 2020 Census” and noted that “negative policy consequences” could result “if an agency drags its feet in performing its PIA obligations.” Nevertheless, the court held that the Bureau may drag its feet in conducting the required assessments “until the Bureau mails its first batch of Census questionnaires to the public” in 2020. EPIC has filed numerous successful lawsuits to require privacy impact assessments, including EPIC's case that led a now-defunct Presidential Commission to delete state voter data it unlawfully obtained. EPIC intends to press forward with the census case, which is captioned EPIC v. Commerce, No. 18-2711 (D.D.C.).
  • EPIC Makes Final Arguments for Injunction Blocking Citizenship Question + (Feb. 6, 2019)
    EPIC has filed a reply brief in EPIC v. Commerce urging a federal court to block the Census Bureau from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census. EPIC alleges that the Census Bureau failed to complete privacy impact assessments, required by law, before it abruptly added the citizenship question last year. Secretary Ross has already suggested that the census data would be used for law enforcement purposes. "Congress expected that the Bureau would conduct a comprehensive privacy review early in the process, not as the census forms were heading to the printer or delivered to the post office," EPIC told the court. A federal court in New York recently blocked the citizenship question, but the Census Bureau has appealed that decision. EPIC filed an amicus brief in the New York case and has long advocated for robust protections for census data. EPIC has also filed numerous successful lawsuits to require privacy impact assessments, including EPIC's lawsuit that led a now-defunct Presidential Commission to delete state voter data it unlawfully obtained.
  • Census Bureau: 99 Percent of Commenters Oppose Citizenship Question + (Jan. 24, 2019)
    According to a Census Bureau report, 99 percent of commenters who gave feedback on the 2020 Census are opposed to the planned addition of the citizenship question. The Bureau received more than 136,000 comments against the collection of citizenship data, many of which were signed by multiple individuals and organizations. EPIC filed comments opposing the citizenship question, arguing that it will interfere with the census's constitutional purpose and undermine the integrity of the census. EPIC is currently seeking a preliminary injunction to block the collection of citizenship data because the Bureau failed to complete privacy impact assessments required by law. The Court has scheduled a hearing for Feb. 8. EPIC's case is EPIC v. Commerce, No. 18-2711 (D.D.C.).
  • EPIC Seeks Injunction to Block Census Citizenship Question + (Jan. 18, 2019)
    EPIC is seeking a preliminary injunction to block the Census Bureau from adding a question about citizenship to the 2020 Census. EPIC alleges that the Census Bureau failed to complete privacy impact assessments, required by law, before it abruptly added the question to the census last year. EPIC explained that the "extraordinary reach of the Bureau into the private lives of Americans brings with it extraordinary risks to privacy." A federal court in New York recently blocked the citizenship question, but the Census Bureau has appealed that decision. EPIC filed an amicus brief in the New York case and has long advocated for robust protections for census data. EPIC has also filed numerous successful lawsuits to require privacy impact assessments, including EPIC's lawsuit that led a now-defunct Presidential Commission to delete state voter data it unlawfully obtained.
  • NY Court Blocks Citizenship Question in 2020 Census + (Jan. 15, 2019)
    A federal judge has ruled that the Secretary of Commerce's decision to add the citizenship question to 2020 Census was unlawful. EPIC filed an amicus brief in the case, arguing that "history has shown that personal data, collected by the government through the census, can threaten individual rights." EPIC has also sued the Department of Commerce (EPIC v. Commerce) because the agency failed to complete a Privacy Impact Assessment prior to collecting citizenship data. A 2004 EPIC FOIA lawsuit revealed that the Census Bureau provided DHS with data on Arab Americans after 9-11, leading the Census Bureau to revise its "sensitive data" policy for transfers to law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
  • EPIC Files Suit to Block Census Citizenship Question + (Nov. 20, 2018)
    EPIC has filed a lawsuit to block the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 Census. EPIC charged that the Census Bureau failed to complete multiple Privacy Impact Assessments, as required by law. The Bureau abruptly added the citizenship question earlier this year but did not assess the privacy impact on census respondents, who are legally obligated to answer all questions. As EPIC's lawsuit reveals, the Bureau recently indicated—for the first time—that personal data provided to the Census Bureau could be used "for criminal law enforcement activities." The Bureau's admission raises new questions about whether citizenship information will be transmitted to the Department of Justice. EPIC has filed numerous successful lawsuits seeking to enforce federal agencies' obligation to publish Privacy Impact Assessments. Earlier this year, the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity was shut down after EPIC filed a lawsuit to block the collection of state voter data and challenging the Commission's failure to complete a Privacy Impact Assessment.
  • In Amicus Brief, EPIC Opposes Citizenship Question in 2020 Census + (Oct. 30, 2018)
    EPIC has filed an amicus brief in a case challenging the addition of a citizenship question to the 2020 census. EPIC expressed support for the decennial tally of those in the US, but warned that, "history has shown that personal data, collected by the government through the census, can threaten individual rights." EPIC said that the Bureau failed to complete an updated Privacy Impact Assessment about the risk that personal data could be used for purposes unrelated to the census. In comments to the Census Bureau, EPIC opposed the citizenship question this year. EPIC also obtained Census Bureau documents in FOIA case, including email from Kris Kobach to Secretary Ross requesting the addition "on the direction of Steve Bannon." A 2004 EPIC FOIA lawsuit revealed that the Census Bureau had provided DHS with data on Arab Americans after 9-11, leading the Census Bureau to revise its "sensitive data" policy for transfers to law enforcement and intelligence agencies. Former Directors of the Census Bureau also filed an amicus brief in New York et al. v. Department of Commerce, opposing the citizenship question.
  • EPIC Urges Removal of Citizenship Question on 2020 Census + (Oct. 3, 2018)
    In advance of the nomination hearing for the Census director, EPIC has sent a statement to a Senate committee urging the Census Bureau to suspend the citizenship question in the 2020 Census until a Privacy Impact Assessment is conducted. The administration conceded that the question was added at the request of the Justice Department, but EPIC explained that census data should never be used for law enforcement because that would undermine the constitutional purpose and the integrity of the census. An earlier Privacy Impact Assessment preceded the addition of the citizenship question. EPIC said that assessment does not meet the agency standards and that the Census is required by law to conduct a revised assessment. Through a Freedom of Information Act request, EPIC obtained documents (part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4) concerning Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and the citizenship question. The census raises significant privacy risks and was used to target Japanese-Americans for internment during World War II. EPIC previously obtained documents which revealed that the Census Bureau transferred the personal data of Muslim Americans to DHS after 9-11. As a consequence of EPIC's lawsuit, the Census Bureau revised its policy on disclosing statistical information about "sensitive populations" to law enforcement and intelligence agencies. EPIC also opposed the addition of the citizenship question in recent comments to the U.S. Census Bureau.
  • EPIC Opposes Citizenship Question on 2020 Census + (Aug. 8, 2018)
    In comments to the U.S. Census Bureau, EPIC opposed the agency's decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. The administration's stated purpose for the question is to assist the DOJ, but EPIC argued that census data should never be used for enforcement purposes because collecting data to enforce laws will interfere with the census's constitutional purpose and will undermine the integrity of the census. The Bureau earlier conducted a Privacy Impact Assessment for the census, but it did not acknowledge the privacy risks raised by the recently added citizenship question. EPIC said the assessment does not meet the Commerce Department's standards and that it is required to conduct a revised assessment, analyzing the privacy risks created by the citizenship question. Through a Freedom of Information Act request, EPIC obtained documents (part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4) concerning Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross and the citizenship question. The census raises significant privacy risks and was used to target Japanese-Americans for internment in World War II. EPIC previously obtained documents which revealed that the Census Bureau transferred the personal data of Muslim Americans to DHS after 9-11. As a consequence of EPIC's lawsuit, the Census Bureau revised its policy on disclosing statistical information about "sensitive populations" to law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
  • Legal Challenge to Citizenship Question on Census Moves Forward + (Jul. 27, 2018)
    A federal judge ruled that lawsuits challenging the Trump administration's decision to add a question on citizenship status to the 2020 census could move forward. The court rejected the administration's claim that the plaintiffs lacked standing and ruled that it was "plausible" that the decision was motivated by racial animus and would result in a discriminatory effect on immigrant communities. Through a Freedom of Information Act request, EPIC obtained documents (part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4) considered by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to add the citizenship question. The census raises significant privacy risks and has been used to discriminate. EPIC previously obtained documents which revealed that the Census Bureau transferred the personal data of Muslim Americans to DHS after 9-11.
  • EPIC FOIA: EPIC Obtains Documents About Decision to Add Census Citizenship Question + (Jun. 11, 2018)
    Through a Freedom of Information Act request, EPIC has obtained documents (part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4) considered by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to add a citizenship question to the 2020 Census. Following a request from the Department of Justice, the Census Bureau announced that it would ask about citizenship status for the first time in over 50 years. The documents obtained by EPIC, and others who made similar requests, reflect the varying opinions from lawmakers, scientists, and immigration groups about the proposal. The documents also reveal that Kris Kobach, former Vice Chair of the now-defunct Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, urged Secretary Ross "on the direction of Steve Bannon" to add the citizenship question. According to an analysis conducted by the Census Bureau, the impact of asking about citizenship would be "very costly, harms the quality of the census count, and would use substantially less accurate citizenship data than are available" from other government resources. In a FOIA case against DHS, EPIC previously obtained documents which revealed that the Census Bureau transferred the personal data of Muslim Americans to the Department of Homeland Security after 9-11. As a consequence, the Census Bureau revised its policy on sharing statistical information about "sensitive populations" with law enforcement or intelligence agencies.
  • EPIC Tells Congress to Consider Census Privacy Risks + (Jun. 8, 2018)
    In advance of a hearing on the 2020 Census, EPIC told Congress to consider the privacy issues arising from potential misuse of Census data. After the Department of Commerce announced that the 2020 Census will include a question on citizenship status, many have expressed concerns about the confidentiality of the data collected. EPIC told Representatives: "your committee should ensure that the data collected by the federal government is not misused." The census raises significant privacy risks and has been used to discriminate. EPIC previously obtained documents which revealed that the Census Bureau transferred the personal data of Muslim Americans to the Department of Homeland Security after 9-11. As a consequence, the Census Bureau revised its policy on disclosing statistical information about "sensitive populations" to law enforcement or intelligence agencies. Customs and Border Protection also changed its policy on requesting "information of a sensitive nature from the Census Bureau."
  • EPIC Tells Congress to Consider Census Privacy Risks + (May. 8, 2018)
    In advance of a hearing on the 2020 Census, EPIC told Congress to consider the privacy issues arising from potential misuse of Census data. After the Department of Commerce announced that the 2020 Census will include a question on citizenship status, many have expressed concerns about the confidentiality of the data collected. EPIC told Representatives: "your committee should ensure that the data collected by the federal government is not misused." The census raises significant privacy risks and has been used to discriminate. EPIC previously obtained documents which revealed that the Census Bureau transferred the personal data of Muslim Americans to the Department of Homeland Security after 9-11. As a consequence, the Census Bureau revised its policy on sharing statistical information about "sensitive populations" with law enforcement or intelligence agencies. Customs and Border Protection also changed its policy on requesting "information of a sensitive nature from the Census Bureau."
  • EPIC Tells Congress to Consider Census Privacy Risks + (Apr. 17, 2018)
    In advance of a hearing on the Census Bureau, EPIC told Congress to consider the privacy issues arising from potential misuse of Census data. After the Department of Commerce announced that the 2020 Census will include a question on citizenship status, many have expressed concerns about the confidentiality of the data collected. EPIC told Representatives: "your committee should ensure that the data collected by the federal government is not misused." The census raises significant privacy risks and has been used to discriminate. EPIC previously obtained documents which revealed that the Census Bureau transferred the personal data of Muslim Americans to the Department of Homeland Security after 9-11. As a consequence, the Census Bureau revised its policy on sharing statistical information about "sensitive populations" with law enforcement or intelligence agencies. Customs and Border Protection also changed its policy on requesting "information of a sensitive nature from the Census Bureau."
  • 2020 US Census to Include Citizenship Question, Senators Introduce Bill to Block + (Mar. 27, 2018)
    The Department of Commerce announced that the 2020 census will include a question on citizenship status. The decennial census has not included a citizenship question since 1950. Critics argue that the question will result in unreliable data collection and skew census results. Senator Menendez (D-NJ) has introduced S. 2580, a bill that would prohibit the census from including a citizenship question. Last week EPIC submitted a Freedom of Information Act request seeking documents on the Department's consideration of the many complicated issues related to the question. The census raises significant privacy risks. EPIC previously obtained documents which revealed that the Census Bureau transferred the personal data of Muslim Americans to DHS after 9-11.
  • EPIC FOIAs Commerce Department about Citizenship Question on 2020 Census + (Mar. 22, 2018)
    EPIC has submitted an urgent Freedom of Information Act request to the Department of Commerce seeking information about a proposed citizenship question on the 2020 census. Secretary Wilbur Ross stated today that the Department of Commerce will make a decision as to whether to include the controversial question in the 2020 census by March 31. Secretary Ross also said, “there are probably 15 or 20 different very complicated issues involved in the request.” EPIC specifically requested information about these issues. The census raises significant privacy risks. EPIC previously obtained documents which revealed that the Census Bureau transferred the personal data of Muslim Americans to DHS after 9-11.

Introduction

Every ten years, as directed by the US Constitution, the Government conducts a census of all individuals in the country. This enumeration is used both for reapportionment of the members of Congress, as well as for the distribution of taxes. Along with the benefits of the census have come many risks. This page outlines risks to privacy posed by the census.

History

The counting of citizens can be traced back to the Biblical recordings of Moses. In the Book of Numbers, Moses counted people in areas surrounding his kingdom in order to strengthen the count of the population under his control. Scholars discuss that the list of names was used as an original census, creating a legal identity of and control over a group of people.

The history of the United States census dates back to pre-Revolutionary times. It is thought that the census was developed to establish an equitable way to distribute the burden of the Revolutionary War, both economically and in manpower. The expense of the war was proposed to be distributed based upon population, among the 13 colonies, as the new United States government was created. In order to make this uniform, the concept of payment by distribution was included in the Articles of Confederation. The original Congress finally voted that the first distribution method would be by the cumulative value of property within each State. Enumeration of population became the chosen method directly after the Revolutionary War.

The modern census was established in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the US Constitution, providing "Representatives...shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers...The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."

The minimal enumeration of the population described in the Constitution was quickly expanded to include business and socioeconomic information. Jefferson was a main proponent of expanding the enumeration, as he wished to obtain "a more detailed view of the inhabitants" of the country. The first enumeration counted free persons, including women, children, and those bound to service, but only counted three-fifths of slaves and excluded untaxed American Indians. As of March 1, 1790, it was directed that US Marshals gather the name of head of families, number of people in each family, all other free people, and slaves. In addition to this information, James Madison sought occupational and industrial information, but Congress did not authorize collection of this information in the first census.

Nevertheless, as historian Robert C. Davis argues, "the crucial point is that the first act pushed beyond the simple constitutional provision, thereby establishing a precedent for the enormous expansion of the census in the following century." By 1800, the census collected more refined age information; by 1810 the census collected economic information; by 1820 the census collected more detailed occupational information; by 1830 the census collected information on physical disability; and by 1840 the census collected investment and productivity information. Through this expansion, protections were developed to maintain the confidentiality of economic questions, but the population survey was publicly posted unitl 1850 in order to allow individuals to check for errors.

After the first census, Thomas Jefferson and the American Philosophical Society lobbied for the expansion of reported census information on age, birthplace, and occupation for the purpose of ascertaining "the causes which influence life and health" and "the conditions and vocations of our fellow citizens." Since then, the census became an instituted method of gathering information about American Society.

The US Census has been administered every ten years since the Revolutionary War, and it was intended to be used primarily for the apportionment of Representatives for Congress. The complexity of the census has grown with the expansion of the United States; the US government has found extensive uses for census related statistics. The census has also been crucial in tracking the population needs of various regions and understanding the structural composition of the nation's population. Politically, the census has become a tool in the process of congressional reapportionment.

  • Wright, Carroll D. "The History and Growth of the US Census" (excerpt).
  • Privacy, the Census and Federal Questionnaires, Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights of the Committee on the Judiciary, US Senate (April 1969).
  • Minnesota Population Center (MPC), University of Minnesota "The Public Use Microdata Samples of the U.S. Census: Research Applications and Privacy Issues". Census 2000 Users' Conference on PUMS, Alexandria, VA (May 22, 2000).
  • Robert C. Davis, Confidentiality and the Census, 1790-1929, appendix to Records, Computers and the Rights of Citizens, Report of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Automated Personal Data Systems, July, 1973.
  • Records and Record Keepers, Records, Computers and the Rights of Citizens, Report of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Automated Personal Data Systems, July, 1973.

The Census and Privacy

The risks that accompany the electronic compilation personal information include re-identification, which is the practice of linking individuals identities to anonymous census records; marketing solicitations; and even more serious consequences of political abuse. The use of information to identify individuals rather than for the statistical collection of information offers room for abuses of privacy and confidentiality.

Risks regarding privacy and confidentiality are not new issues for the Census. According to Thomas S. Mayer, privacy interests have evolved from the very first census in 1790. In the history of the American census, these privacy concerns have regulated the confidentiality of released information and the privacy considerations of individuals. Recorded protest in 1870 up until 1960 reflect the constitutional issues resulting from the requirement for US residents to provide sensitive personal information. Questions on the census about diseases, mortgage values, and other items have raised many risks.

The census forms the most inclusive federal database of American citizens. The information it contains is protected under law from disclosure, yet with the advent of technology many of the traditional legislative protection are inadequate. The recent use of computers has dramatically altered the structure of the US census. It has allowed the Census Bureau to retain information in an efficient format, while also challenging the traditional methods of information collection. Along with this growing technology, the potential harm has grown exponentially. Technology has allowed the collection of information to move at remarkable speeds and the protection of such information remains a struggle.

  • Kysar, Douglas A., Kids & Cul-De-Sacs: Census 2000 and the Reproduction of Consumer Culture, 87 Cornell L. Rev. 853 (2001).
  • Mayer, Thomas S. "Privacy and Confidentiality Research and the US Census Bureau: Recommendations Based on a Review of the Literature". Research Report Series (Survey Methodology #2002-01) Statistical Research Division, US Bureau of the Census, Feb. 7, 2002, Statistical Review of public and interviewer perceptions.

Statutory Authority for the Census

Title 13 of the US Code regulates the structure of the census and its uses by the government and private entities. 13 USC § 6 authorizes the Census Bureau to acquire data from other agencies instead of conducting direct inquiries. Each agency can then share information, rather than recollecting it. This allows the Census Bureau to receive certain information from agencies like the Social Security Administration or the Internal Revenue Service.

Title 13 USC § 9 regulates privacy of information collected in the Census. Section 9 requires information gathered by the Bureau be kept confidential and be used exclusively for statistical purposes. The statute provides penalties for employees who willfully disclose such information illegally. Part A of Section 9 expressly restricts the Census Bureau from: 1) using the information for any purpose other than statistics, 2) making any publication allowing any individual to be identified or 3) permitting any unauthorized person to examine the census reports. Only authorized people may have Official Copies of the census reports. Even in the case of litigation, census reports are restricted from legal evidence.

Under federal law, individuals can be fined for not completing census questionnaires. Section 221 requires a fine when an individual does not fill out the form, as well as a fine for providing false information. Several cases in the 1960s confirmed that a penalty would be enforced in instances of incomplete questionnaires or lack of response. U.S. v. Richenbacker held that even if social scientists find the questionnaires to be larger than necessary, the enforcement of fines is constitutional. However, fines for non-completion have not been levied in recent years.

Part C of Section 221 does make it illegal for the government to ask questions regarding religion on the census form. Even with the restrictions dictated in Title 13, problems still exist when determining between authorized use and appropriate use. The standard is left to the judgment of agencies, which then weigh the costs and benefits of restricting census information.

  • Dunne, Timothy. Issues in the Establishment and Management of Secure Research Sites, Confidentiality, Disclosure, and Data Access: Theory and Practical Application for Statistical Agencies (Doyle, Lane, Theeuwes, Zayatz, eds., NY: North-Holland 2001)
  • US v. Richenbacker, 309 F.2d 462 (1962).
  • US. v. Sharrow, 309 F.2d 77 (1962).

Risks of the Census

The census performs many useful functions for society. However, there is widespread evidence of the misuse of census data. Hitler notably used the European Census in his conquests across Europe. The misuse of census data can be found in much of the world, including in our own nation. Even recently, privacy risks lead to public statements by politicians regarding the intrusiveness of census questions. The Washington Post quoted Former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott of encouraging citizens not to answer invasive questions.

  • D'Vera Cohn, Census Too Nosy? Don't Answer Invasive Questions, GOP Suggests, Washington Post, Mar. 30, 2000, at A1

The Civil War

Along with the benefits of census information for war planning, the census can be used for methods of destruction as a war tactic. General Sherman used census data to locate targets during the famed Civil War March though Georgia.

World War II and Japanese Internment

A specific example of the privacy risks of the US census can also be found in the 1940s. During World War II, Japanese-American citizens were rounded up and sent to internment camps. The Census Bureau might not have necessarily given out individual Japanese-American names or numbers, but the Bureau did work with US War Department to offer aggregated data about certain localities. Although there is still a lack of consensus concerning specific conclusions, the Census Bureau has issued a formal apology and now reports that the Bureau did not protect Japanese-Americans.

It has been recorded that even before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt ordered the Census Bureau to collect information on "American-born and foreign-born Japanese" from the Census data lists. Information was gathered from the 1930 and 1940 censuses on all Japanese-Americans and then given to the FBI and top military officials. These sources point directly to the census information as one of the reasons that led to the internment of almost 110,000 Japanese-Americans on the West Coast, two-thirds of whom were U.S. citizens.

United Kingdom

A recent example of abuse from abroad can be found in the United Kingdom. It recently has reached the public view that compulsory transfers were considered in Northern Ireland in 1972. A UK government top-secret memo has surfaced describing a plan to relocate Irish Catholics. The plan was written with census data. Although never implemented, the use of census data for non-statistical purposes has caused great concern in Europe.

Germany

Germany has a contrasting history in census reporting. The most extreme example of census abuse is Hitler's use of the census to track minorities for extermination during the NAZI regime. Although this example remains perhaps the most horrifying abuse of the census, Germany's modern use of the census is exactly the opposite. In the aftermath of World War II, privacy protections were placed in the German Constitution. In the 1980s, the German Government instituted a law requiring more information to be provided on the national census. After a public outcry, the law was challenged in court. The issue was brought before the German Federal Constitutional Court by representatives who had been instrumental in the passage of the first German Data Protection Act during the 1970s. The court found the census law unconstitutional based upon what the court termed a fundamental right to informational self-determination implicit in the German Constitution.

After the court decision, the legislature amended the German Data Protection Act in 1990 to include the right of informational self-determination regarding government uses of information as well as information use in the private sector. By including private uses as well, Germany created one of the most broadly reaching privacy protections relating to the census.

European privacy concerns over the census have appeared in strong numbers. Mayer reports on several surveys taken in the 1970's regarding risks over privacy of census reports. In particular England, Germany, the Netherlands, and Northern Ireland reportedly protested in large numbers against the census' undermining of information privacy.

  • Kent Walker, Where Everybody Knows Your Name: A Pragmatic Look at the Costs of Privacy and the Benefits of Information Exchange, 1 Stan. Tech. L. Rev. 106 (2000)(citing Jerry M. Rosenberg, The Death Of Privacy 1 (1969)).
  • Mayer, Thomas S. "Privacy and Confidentiality Research and the US Census Bureau: Recommendations Based on a Review of the Literature". Research Report Series (Survey Methodology #2002-01) Statistical Research Division, US Bureau of the Census, Feb. 7, 2002, Statistical Review of public and interviewer perceptions.
  • Richard Sobel. The Demeaning of Identity and Personhood in the National Identification Systems,15 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 319 (2002).
  • Viktor Mayer-Schonberger, Privacy and the Law: A Symposium, No Choice: Trans-Atlantic Information Privacy Legislation and Rational Choice Theory, 67 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1309 (1999).
  • Edwin Black, IBM and the Holocaust: The Strategic Alliance Between Nazi Germany and America's Most Powerful Corporation (Crown Publishers 2002).
  • Commission belge de la Protection de la Vie Privée, Avis d'initiative No. 37/2001 of October 8, 2001 concernant l'enquête socio-économique 2001. (Belgian Data Protection Authority's opinion on the compatibility of the 2001 ten-yearly census survey with Belgian privacy regulations.)

Obscuring Individual Data

There are many techniques used to mask data. The challenges of obscuring individual data derive from growing technology and the increasing demand for information. With every new technological advancement in protection of private information, technology is also created to undo such protections. Along with the technological problems of protecting information, there is also the problem of the societal demand for information. The government faces pressure from both the information brokerage industry, who derive their profit off the sale of private information, as well as from branches within the government.

One of the primary methods used to obscure individuals' data is to inflate certain lists of information. List inflation can be used to protect confidentiality by adding nonexistent variables. This is also known as "commingling" or "salting". One controversial technique of traditional data protection is through the use of "noise," by deliberately fudging numbers. "Noise" adds random error to quantitative variables. It can also switch variables for similar respondents to obscure the results further. The noise technique does not provide absolute protection. Due to increased technology, the noise method is more vulnerable to modern computer programs which can unscramble any noise patterns.

  • GAO-01-126SP Record Linkage and Privacy, OMB Report Chapters on Re-identification, Privacy Statutes, Report on Data Protection Methods.

Re-Identification

Public use datasets contain 'anonymous' microdata, information on individual people and organizations where the explicit identifiers have been stripped away. Microdata can then be transferred even in blocks of just a few individuals. Under 13 USC § 9, the Census Bureau is required to make sure that the identities cannot be "reasonably deduced." Concepts of "reasonable deduction," however, are changing quickly.

Re-identification is the process of linking anonymous data to the actual identity of an individual. Carnegie Mellon Professor Latanya Sweeney has demonstrated that anonymous data sets can often be readily re-identified. In one experiment, Sweeney, using 1990 Census data, demonstrated that individuals often have demographic values that occur infrequently. Since these values occur infrequently, they allow the re-identification of individuals in putatively anonymous datasets. Sweeney found in her report Uniqueness of Simple Demographics in the U.S. Population:

...87% (216 million of 248 million) of the population in the United States had reported characteristics that likely made them unique based only on {5-digit ZIP, gender, date of birth}. About half of the U.S. population (132 million of 248 million or 53%) are likely to be uniquely identified by only {place, gender, date of birth}, where place is basically the city, town, or municipality in which the person resides. And even at the county level, {county, gender, date of birth} are likely to uniquely identify 18% of the U.S. population. In general, few characteristics are needed to uniquely identify a person.

Re-identification can also be enhanced through the use of commercially available or public records databases. Census data can be combined with other datasets in order to identify individuals. Some re-identification software is available commercially.

Re-identification is legal in the United States. However, some countries have attempted to address re-identification in a legal framework. Germany, for instance, recently proscribed census re-identification.

Business Influence Over the Census

For much of American history, business interests have shaped questions in order to capture marketing data from the census. For instance, the 2000 census long form asked numerous questions about home and consumption habits. Even in the late 19th Century, business associations have played a strong role in the creation of specific census questions. Rather than just including the original questions of race, age, sex, the census grew to include complex socioeconomic questions. Various statistical associations along with the Chairperson of the Board of the American Marketing Association appoint the members of the official Census Advisory Committee of Professional Associations.

In a hearing before the House Government Reform Subcommittee on the Census in 1998, the Members openly discussed the connection between consumer marketing and census data. The information provided in the census is used to construct marketing and strategic planning for companies. Starbucks' location strategy serves as the prime example; the sites for stores are closely examined and determined according to any data available from the government. Because of the economic impact of such information, data marketers formed lobbying groups who encourage lawmakers to continue to make such information publicly available.

Consumer marketing companies use the census to evaluate much more then income, race, gender, and the location of potential customers. Companies can evaluate the workplace, leisure activity, and consumption patterns of individuals. This can be attempted through "geodemographic segmentation," which combines the population and housing census information from several categories. Using geographic, demographic and psychographic (focusing on lifestyle rather than demographic information as a basis for describing segments of data) approaches, marketing companies can use the census information to construct lifestyle profiles. The marketing companies Claritas, CACI Marketing, Mediamark Research, Inc., former R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, and others have used various types of census based marketing systems.

The influence of marketing associations on the development of the census cannot be ignored. In the face of growing privacy violations, lawmakers are consistently choosing to expand the level of information available from the Census Bureau. Between one or more databases, individual identity can be reconstructed within the same street block. In a group of 15 individuals, it is not difficult for a marketer to identify the one person of the characteristics listed in census information. With various computer programs that synthesize such information, an individual can re-identify any small group of people from the information provided to marketers.

  • Kysar, Douglas A., Kids & Cul-De-Sacs: Census 2000 and the Reproduction of Consumer Culture, 87 Cornell L. Rev. 853 (2001).
  • U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Dep't of Commerce, Charter of the Census Advisory Committee of Professional Associations (Mar. 27, 2000).
  • Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Federal Register Vol. 68, No. 54, March 20, 2003.

Other Issues

Enumeration and Data Quality

The Census Bureau has been conducting an ongoing study to determine privacy attitudes surrounding the enumeration and data quality. The importance of correct enumeration and data quality has both political and social ramifications. On the societal effects, the public opinion regarding the quality of the census has a crucial impact on the number of questionnaires returned. If the general public does not see the importance of a national census, responses are likely to be low. The Census Bureau has calculated that an added cost for item non-response and misinformation must be expected in the cost of each census.

In the political arena, enumeration plays a crucial role in the construction of the Electoral College and the party outcome in elections. Enumeration is used for redrawing districts, therefore either adding or subtracted Electoral numbers. All parties have played a role in bargaining over the necessary quality of the national census. Particularly, the number of minorities counted has caused debate. The undercounting of minorities has become a frequent problem, due to both non-response as well as difficulties in racial categorizing.

  • Mayer, Thomas S. Privacy and Confidentiality Research and the US Census Bureau: Recommendations Based on a Review of the Literature, Research Report Series (Survey Methodology #2002-01) Statistical Research Division, US Bureau of the Census, Feb. 7, 2002, Statistical Review of public and interviewer perceptions.
  • Anderson, Margo and Stephen E. Fienberg, Census 2000: Politics and Statistics, 32 U. Tol. L. Rev. 19 (2000).

Social Security Numbers

The use of the Social Security Number on public documents remains one of the most controversial topics in privacy regulation. Recently, the Census Bureau has engaged in a study to see whether the public will object to the collection of Social Security numbers on census forms. The Census Bureau has created a program called SPAN, Social Security Number, Privacy Attitudes and Notification Experiment. The experiment would consist of asking 20,000 people to fill out their special census form, which would include their SSN. Meanwhile, the Census Bureau has begun to expand interagency sharing of Social Security numbers. In 1998, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration approved the Census Bureau's request for the file of SSN applicants (also called the Numident File).

The Administrative Records Steering Committee continues to assess whether or not a public outcry would follow the use of SSNs in the Census. Their studies have recognized that there are numerous considerations, particularly due to issues of controlling data.

Microdata

Microdata is a concept derived from the public use of samples of information. Data samples are used for statistical analysis of past census reports. Microdata allows researchers to create tabulations tailored to particular questions regarding the filed information. These files include nearly all the detail originally recorded by the census enumerations. The use of microdata can construct a great variety of interrelating figures to compile a set of variables for analysis. Microdata is particularly used for historical research because the aggregate tabulations produced by the Census Bureau are often not comparable across time.

A critical issue today is how large the sample sizes are and what exactly each contains. During the period since the 1940 census, microdata are subject to confidentiality measures that limit their usefulness for some applications. The available samples for these years include no names, addresses or other potentially identifying information. To further ensure that no individuals can be identified, the Census Bureau is required to limit the information regarding residence, place of work, high incomes, and several other variables. By changing the size and variables in new samples, the microdata could show completely different statistical results.

Rather than looking at larger statistics of cities or large towns, individuals can now research statistics according to a Census Bureau program called TIGER, Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing system. This system creates custom reports for any area defined, including a small neighborhood. The Public Use Microdata Sample files would then allow users to see the actual census questionnaires, albeit without the actual name or address. If one combines the two programs, the likelihood of identifying individuals is high.

News Items

Cases

  • Dep't of Commerce v. US House of Representatives, 525 U.S. 316 (1999). The Supreme Court held that the current language of Title 13 required that statistical sampling could not be used for the apportionment of seats in the House of Representatives.
  • St. Regis Paper Co. v. US, 368 US 208 (1962). The Supreme Court held that the company-retained copies of census reports could be subpoenaed and used against the reporting company in legal proceedings (so that the paper company was required to submit copies of their economic census forms to the FTC). According to some scholars, this can lower the business community's confidence in the reporting system and jeopardized the Federal statistical system.
  • US v. Little, 321 F. Supp. 388 (D. Del. 1971). The court found that information obtained by the census is strictly confidential under 13 USC § 9 and may not be used other than for statistical reporting and may never be disclosed in any manner so as to identify any person who has answered the questions.
  • US v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 21 FRD 568 (D.N.Y. 1958). This case regarded an antitrust action against a steel corporation, when the US Department of Justice wanted to receive Census reports from Department of Commerce for the investigation. Court stated that the protection of privacy of census information is so clear and compelling that there is no basis for making census records available in such actions.
  • US v. Moriarity, 106 F. 886, 1091 U.S. App. Lexis 3634 (S.D.N.Y. 1901).
  • In re FTC Corporate Patterns Report Litigation, 432 F. Supp. 291 (D.D.C. 1977). The court decided that Congress intended to protect "copies" of the Census report and not general information relating to Census results. The case was determined from assessments of the legislative history of 13 USC 9(a).

FOIA Documents

Resources

Share this page:

Defend Privacy. Support EPIC.
US Needs a Data Protection Agency
2020 Election Security