The recent proposal by the U.S. Census Bureau and Commerce Department to include a citizenship question in the 2020 census is a wrong-headed move, being opposed on several fronts, that should be rebuffed in the courts.

Hawaii is not part of the multi-city, multi-state legal action, but it has an interest in the outcome, and needs the assurances of an accurate census, which helps to determine the needs of the population and set its federal funding support, as well as apportionment of congressional districts.

From outside the courtroom, however, many in this state have said they oppose citizenship becoming a census data point. Those who want to assess the proposal fairly must evaluate it on the basis of the message it sends, and whether that defeats the very purpose of conducting a census.

To do that, one must consider the context of the times: who is sending the message and who is its intended target.

The sender, of course, is the administration of President Donald Trump, who has been overtly hostile toward those in the country illegally since his presidential campaign. Setting aside whether one believes that is justified — and there are many people who do — a message that’s less than friendly to immigrants, legal or otherwise, has been reinforced on multiple occasions since he took office.

The administration has worked to restrict those given visas to enter the country; the policy, dubbed the “Muslim ban,” is being litigated, but the intention is clear.

There is the border wall proposal, a centerpiece of the president’s agenda. While that’s still awaiting funding support, Trump on Wednesday signed a proclamation deploying the National Guard to patrol the U.S.-Mexico border as a demonstration of his border-security stance.

There is the Department of Justice with its position against “sanctuary cities,” where local law enforcement can operate without calling in the federal authorities on matters of immigration.

Then there is the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, the Obama-era program known as DACA, aimed at providing a haven for those who were brought to the U.S. as children illegally, through no fault of their own. The president himself has in the past expressed sympathy for the so-called “Dreamers,” the beneficiaries of this program, which is being kept alive while it, too, is being litigated.

Trump had said he would be willing to have the executive-branch program formalized through congressional action. But in those negotiations, he plainly wanted a reduction in legal immigration tied to any granting of legal status to the Dreamers. Finally, this week, at the annual White House Easter egg roll, Trump unceremoniously dispelled all vestiges of hope that there could be a DACA compromise.

Message received.

Now, turning to the recipients of this pointed message: Many immigrants, those here legally but particularly illegally, come from countries where there is little trust of their government. Given the anti-immigrant rhetoric from this government, fear is swelling over drastic and harsh treatment.

Supporters of the proposed citizenship question say the Census is prohibited from turning over information to immigration authorities, in any case. But that’s beside the point — what matters is what the subjects of the survey, the potential Census respondents, believe.

And if they believe their participation puts them at risk of deportation, they are all but certain to stay away.

That will leave the nation — this state, along with all the others that have a substantial population of immigrants — with an inaccurate count. And that is the argument the opponents are rightly making: The Census has a constitutional obligation to count everyone in the country, regardless of legal status.

If the administration intends to crack down on illegal immigration, that is a legitimate policy stance and it has the right to pursue it. But it must find a vehicle other than the U.S. Census.