Base redistricting on the count of citizens? Base apportionment on it?

Gorsuch Comments Preview Endgame If Citizenship Question Is Added To Census

Redistricting is a matter of states carving themselves up into X districts once the census data determine they are to have X seats in the federal House of Representatives, as well as into districts for representation in their state legislatures.

Apportionment of seats in the House of Representatives to the various states, according to the constitution, is to be based on the census, a count of all persons in the states, not a count of all citizens.

And the regnant view of what the principle "one person, one vote" requires is that state legislative districts as well as federal house districts must contain as nearly as possible equal populations, not equal populations of citizens.

There is some concern a conservative court would allow redistricting of state legislative districts and federal House districts to be based on equal populations of citizens.

And there is concern that a conservative court might decide apportionment should be based on the states' totals of citizens rather than persons, perhaps appealing to the supposed aims or expectations of the original framers (ratifiers?) of the relevant portion of the 14th Amendment, though contrary to the clear meaning of its words and every court's interpretation ever since.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.

Elsewhere it is being reported that a leading concern of Democrats - and one may suppose a hope of Republicans - is that illegals will be afraid to complete the census and so the census will under-report population in states with lots of them, resulting in fewer seats in the house being assigned Democratic states.

But if the Supremes decide on such a reading of the 14th Amendment rule of apportionment the results would be, one supposes, even worse for the Democrats.

Update.

The constitution's theory of representation cannot plausibly be said to be that only voters are represented, or only citizens.

It is clear that the theory, at any rate since the Civil War, has been that elected officials represent everyone in their constituencies, adults and children, voters and nonvoters, men and women, . . . just everybody, excepting Indians not taxed.

And that exception has been left behind, too.

Equality of representation of all persons is what is guaranteed by apportionment and redistricting based on population.

Not equality of votes across districts, or equality of influence of voters across districts.