A subpoena is issued on probably cause, not on bureaucratic curiosity. Nonetheless you are right it does not ask about legal residency status. It does have a question about citizenship and how you acquired it. Were I not a legal residence that question would make me VERY nervous.

@FraserOrr This is incorrect. Search warrants are issued on probable cause. Subpoenas are not. A search warrant is disruptive and issued without notice. A subpoena is an order to someone to comply personally at some time in the future (usually 2-14 days), not have someone come into your home or business unannounced.

My mistake, nonetheless, were I a resident without a visa and I got this form? It is a form from the government that is about to be taken over by Trump and Holman, which asks my name, phone number, address, lists all my children and spouse... Irrespective of what you think of the incoming administration, were I here without papers I'd do everything in my power to not fill in this form.

The standard for government power is not whether it makes you feel nervous. See, e.g., compulsory military service.

@FraserOrr Census information is also confidential for something like 70 years.

@FraserOrr having worked for the Census Bureau and having had a number of family members in the Census Bureau, I can tell you that the administration can have no access to the personal data in the survey. The Census Bureau is entitled and actually required to only share aggregated data outside of the bureau.

If the data is collected, then regardless of supposed "confidentiality", it can be shared by the government agency intentionally, or it can be hacked, or it can be leaked by a politically-motivated actor. Examples: The Census Bureau provided the military with information such as names and addresses from the 1940 Census to help identify and incarcerate Japanese Americans. The Office of Personnel Management data breach (attributed to China) included millions of fingerprints. Charles Littlejohn stole and leaked thousands of IRS records (but was punished for only one instance).

@FraserOrr If you were staying in the US illegally, then I'm not sure why you would care about the legality of the survey or of not answering its questions.

@FraserOrr, you are entirely correct (in my opinion). However, it appears you are here to persuade rather than get an answer. Q&A is the purpose of this site. Our concerns about this might better be served by harassing a Congressman or writing to EFF or ACLU or some such.

@ohwilleke "something like 70 years" --> 72 years.

@PaŭloEbermann Anyone who didn't want it disclosed would probably have standing to challenge the release as a vested right. I couldn't tell if you it would prevail (especially with the current court that rather freely abandons long established precedents).

What does “so” in the first sentence relate to? People are rarely punished for doing what exactly? Not answering?

@JanusBahsJacquet Correct.

So I do not have a 4th amendment right "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated" This is considered reasonable?

@ohwilleke As long as this current court can define women, I'm cool with it.

@paulj It doesn't need to be reasonable, as it's neither a search nor a seizure. Your Fourth Amendment rights are unaffected.