WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court’s conservative majority seemed ready Tuesday to uphold the Trump administration’s plan to ask about citizenship on the 2020 census , despite evidence that millions of Hispanics and immigrants could go uncounted.

There appeared to be a clear divide between the court’s liberal and conservative justices in arguments in a case that could affect how many seats states have in the House of Representatives and their share of federal dollars over the next 10 years. States with a large number of immigrants tend to vote Democratic.

Three lower courts have so far blocked the plan to ask every U.S. resident about citizenship in the census, finding that the question would discourage many immigrants from being counted. Two of the three judges also ruled that asking if people are citizens would violate the provision of the Constitution that calls for a count of the population, regardless of citizenship status, every 10 years. The last time the question was included on the census form sent to every American household was 1950.

But over 80 minutes in a packed courtroom, the conservative justices did not appear to share the concern of the lower court judges.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the court’s newest member and an appointee of President Donald Trump, suggested Congress could change the law if it so concerned that the accuracy of the once-a-decade population count will suffer. “Why doesn’t Congress prohibit the asking of the citizenship question?” Kavanaugh asked near the end of the morning session.

Kavanaugh and the other conservatives were mostly silent when Solicitor General Noel Francisco, the administration’s top Supreme Court lawyer, defended Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’ decision to add the citizenship question. Ross has said the Justice Department wanted the citizenship data, the detailed information it would produce on where eligible voters live, to improve enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.

Lower courts found that Ross’ explanation was a pretext for adding the question, noting that he had consulted early in his tenure with Stephen Bannon, Trump’s former top political adviser and immigration hardliner Kris Kobach, the former Kansas secretary of state.

The liberal justices peppered Francisco with questions about the administration plan, but they would lack the votes to stop it without support from at least one conservative justice.

“This is a solution in search of a problem,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the court’s lone Hispanic member, said of Ross’ decision.

Justice Elena Kagan chimed in that “you can’t read this record without sensing that this need was a contrived one.”

Chief Justice John Roberts appeared to have a different view of the information the citizenship question would produce.

“You think it wouldn’t help voting rights enforcement?” Roberts asked New York Solicitor General Barbara Underwood, who was representing states and cities that sued over Ross’ decision.

Underwood said the evidence Ross had before him was “that it would not give better citizenship information.”

And, Underwood said, the record is clear that a census that asks people if they are citizens will be less accurate.

Census Bureau experts have concluded that the census would produce a more accurate picture of the U.S. population without a citizenship question because people might be reluctant to say if they or others in their households are not citizens. Federal law requires people to complete the census accurately and fully.

The Supreme Court is hearing the case on a tight timeframe, even though no federal appeals court has yet to weigh in. A decision is expected by late June, in time to print census forms for the April 2020 population count.

The administration argues that the commerce secretary has wide discretion in designing the census questionnaire and that courts should not be second-guessing his action. States, cities and rights groups that sued over the issue don’t even have the right to go into federal court, the administration says. It also says the citizenship question is plainly constitutional because it has been asked on many past censuses and continues to be used on smaller, annual population surveys.

Justice Neil Gorsuch, also a Trump appointee, also noted that many other countries include citizenship questions on their censuses.

Douglas Letter, a lawyer representing the House of Representatives, said the census is critically important to the House, which apportions its seats among the states based on the results. “Anything that undermines the accuracy of the actual enumeration is immediately a problem,” Letter said, quoting from the provision of the Constitution that mandates a decennial census.

Letter also thanked the court on behalf of Speaker Nancy Pelosi for allowing the House to participate in the arguments.

“Tell her she’s welcome,” Roberts replied.

OVERLAND PARK, Kan. (AP) — A 70-year-old driver told investigators that his brakes failed before his car careened onto a suburban Kansas City sidewalk where it struck and killed a 14-year-old girl and narrowly missed three other children.

Police in Overland Park, Kansas, released the report Monday about the April 12 crash that killed Alexandra Rumple as she was walking home from a nearby middle school. The report says the driver had a valid license without any restriction and showed no evidence of impairment. Toxicology results are pending.

Police say the car also hit a traffic light, knocking it off its base, struck a speed limit sign and destroyed about 80 feet of a wood fence. The driver told police he tried to stop, but his brakes weren’t working.

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — Missouri Gov. Mike Parson is setting special elections to fill two vacant state House seats.

Parson on Monday said elections will be held Nov. 5 to replace former Republican Reps. Scott Fitzpatrick and Jean Evans.

Parson named Fitzpatrick state treasurer in December. His former House seat covers the southwest Missouri counties of Barry, Lawrence and Stone.

Evans stepped down from her St. Louis County seat in February to take a job as executive director of the Missouri Republican Party.

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — Republicans pushing to repeal a constitutional amendment that revamped Missouri’s redistricting process are finding unusual allies in some black Democrats in the Legislature, who are concerned the new districts might disenfranchise black voters.

A part of the amendment, called Clean Missouri, would change how state legislative districts are redrawn after the 2020 census. An Associated Press analysis last year found the new plan will likely improve Democrats’ chances of winning more seats in the Legislature.

Most Democrats in the Statehouse support the amendment approved by voters in November. But some members of the Legislative Black Caucus say they worry the change could dilute the black vote by creating new districts that spread out black voters into majority white districts, The Kansas City Star reported . The Black Caucus has not taken an official stand on the issue.

Debate on a possible repeal is scheduled for this week in the Missouri House.

“There are definitely concerns in the caucus that the way it was written could create long, spaghetti string districts and dilute the black vote at a time when we have historic black representation in the House,” said Rep. Steve Roberts, a St. Louis Democrat and chairman of the Black Caucus.

Republicans are using the divide in the Democratic Party to support their efforts to repeal the amendment.

“I fear – and I not only fear, I believe – that it’s likely this is going to disenfranchise African American voters in St. Louis and Kansas City,” said Sen. Bob Onder, a Republican from St. Charles County.

Clean Missouri’s supporters note the amendment specifically requires districts to comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which outlawed discriminatory voting practices. It also says districts cannot deny or abridge the “equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in the political process” or to diminish “their ability to elect representatives of their choice.”

“The people read (Clean Missouri). They understood it. They voted for it. Don’t undo the will of the people,” said Nimrod Chapel Jr., president of the NAACP Missouri State Conference and treasurer for the Clean Missouri campaign in 2018.

Clean Missouri requires a new nonpartisan state demographer to draft maps for state House and Senate districts, with a goal of “partisan fairness” and “competitiveness” as determined by statistical measurements using the results of previous elections. Districts also must be contiguous and limit splits among counties and cities. The maps will be submitted to existing bipartisan commissions for approval.

Under the previous system, commissions appointed by party committees and the governor drew the new districts. Republicans and Democrats got an equal number of seats on the commissions, which were typically made up of lobbyists, political consultants and elected officials. If the commissions failed to approve new maps, the state Supreme Court appointed six appellate judges to draw new lines.

The new system requires that competitiveness be a factor in how districts are drawn, a big change from the previous method. The goal is a more even mix of voters in redrawn districts so that one party wouldn’t have an advantage.

PHELPS COUNTY — One person died in an accident just after 2a.m. Tuesday in Phelps County.

The Missouri State Highway Patrol reported a 2013 Dodge Grand Caravan driven by Kwilasa Razafinjatovo, 32, Laquey, was westbound on Interstate 44 just west of Rolla.

The driver fell asleep and the van ran off the road struck a ditch, overturned and a passenger was ejected.

Phelps Health Ambulance transported Razafinjatovo and passengers Begum Razafinjatovo, 59; Gaetan Razafinjatovo, 64, both of Brussels Belgium and Johnna M. Oshields, 32, Laquey, to Phelps Health Hospital where Begum died.

She was not wearing a seat belt, according to the MSHP.

By JOHN HANNA AP Political Writer

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — Kansas’ attorney general on Monday asked the state Supreme Court to settle an unprecedented dispute between Gov. Laura Kelly and a top lawmaker over whether Kelly can name a new lower-court judge after withdrawing her first pick.

The Democratic governor announced last week that she is moving ahead with submitting a new state Court of Appeals nominee to the GOP-dominated Senate for confirmation despite the objections of Senate President Susan Wagle, a conservative Wichita Republican. Wagle said Monday that Kelly is showing “blatant disrespect” for the law governing appointments to the state’s second-highest court.

Kelly was forced last month to withdraw the nomination of her first choice, Labette County District Judge Jeffry Jack, over political posts on his Twitter feed in 2017. Some included foul language or acronyms and one described President Donald Trump as “Fruit Loops.”

Wagle contends that by withdrawing Jack’s appointment, Kelly missed the legal deadline for nominating an appeals judge and the choice now falls to Supreme Court Chief Justice Lawton Nuss. The governor contends she met the deadline and gets to try again.

Attorney General Derek Schmidt, also a Republican, filed a petition Monday with the Supreme Court arguing that the law is “silent on this question.”

“It provides no legal authority for either the governor or the chief justice to fill a vacancy in this situation,” Schmidt wrote.

Jack’s failed nomination was a major embarrassment for the new governor and raised questions about her vetting process. No governor has missed making an appointment to the Court of Appeals since the state created it in 1978.

Schmidt asked the Supreme Court to expedite a decision. Legislators return May 1 from an annual spring break but are scheduled to wrap up their work for the year on May 17.

Veteran appeals court Judge Patrick McAnany retired the day Kelly took office in January. The 2013 appointments law says if the governor fails to make a nomination within 60 days, the choice falls to the Supreme Court’s chief justice.

Kelly announced Jack’s nomination on the March 15 deadline and withdrew it four days later. Wagle accused the governor Monday of trying to “bypass” the law.

“We should not escalate this conflict further but instead seek resolution on the legal question of who holds power to make the next nomination,” Wagle said before Schmidt filed his petition.

The law says that if the Senate rejects a nominee, the governor names another, without addressing what happens if a nominee withdraws without a vote. Kelly and her staff have argued that Jack represents a failed nomination.

“We need to get somebody on the Court of Appeals,” Kelly told reporters Monday. “We just need to get that language clarified, but in the meantime, I think it’s important that we go ahead with the process.”