A federal judge in California has blocked an emergency request by the Department of Justice to segregate and exclude approximately 20,000 mail-in ballots from voters the Trump administration alleges may be noncitizens. The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge David O. Carter on October 28, prevents California election officials from separating ballots while litigation continues, allowing the state to proceed with its normal ballot-counting procedures ahead of the November 3 midterm elections.
The decision follows a 3½-hour hearing on October 27, where attorneys for California, Los Angeles County, and voting rights groups argued against the federal government’s demands. Judge Carter’s 26-page order emphasized that the DOJ’s request would violate constitutional principles granting states authority over their own elections and could disrupt an ongoing election already underway.
Judge Carter’s Ruling
In his ruling, Judge Carter denied the DOJ’s motion for a temporary restraining order, calling the federal government’s intervention unprecedented and coercive. He wrote that the request would “wreak havoc and disrupt the election that is already underway” and “create a chilling effect on election workers and voters alike.” Carter also noted that the DOJ had not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of its claims, stating that the federal government’s allegations were “not credible.”
The judge highlighted that the DOJ’s methodology for identifying potential noncitizens was “vague” and raised “significant concerns” about its accuracy. He pointed out that preliminary reviews by Los Angeles County found many individuals on the DOJ’s list either did not have active voter registrations or were born in the United States, contradicting the federal government’s claims.
Carter also warned that granting the DOJ’s request could set a dangerous precedent, allowing either political party to “create chaos for their own political purposes to disrupt the election process.” He added that the federal government has alternative remedies, such as prosecuting individuals for illegally voting, rather than attempting to alter state election procedures on the eve of an election.
Background of the Dispute
The legal dispute began on October 15, when the DOJ filed a lawsuit alleging that California election officials had failed to meet a 48-hour deadline to review a list of 20,000 voters the federal government claimed were likely noncitizens. The DOJ provided the list to state officials on a password-protected thumb drive, but California election workers found that many names were either absent from voter rolls or listed as suspended, meaning those individuals would not receive mail-in ballots.
The federal government had previously claimed in July that 190,000 registered California voters could be ineligible due to their citizenship status. However, the DOJ has refused to release details about how it compiled this list, leaving state officials unable to verify its accuracy. Attorneys for California argued during the hearing that the government’s allegations were “vague” and “not reliable,” calling the DOJ’s evidence insufficient.
Reactions and Broader Implications
The DOJ has filed at least 31 federal lawsuits seeking access to voter rolls across the country, but has prevailed in none of them. In response to the ruling, a DOJ spokesperson stated that the department is “reviewing the court’s decision” and reiterated its commitment to “protecting the integrity of elections.”
California officials and voting rights advocates praised the ruling, calling it a vindication of state sovereignty and a protection against federal overreach. Anne Bellows, an attorney representing California, argued during the hearing that the DOJ’s request would “disenfranchise eligible voters” and “undermine public trust in elections.”
The ruling is the second time in three days that a federal court has rejected the DOJ’s emergency request. On October 26, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to block the ballots, as Judge Carter had not yet issued his decision. The DOJ had also filed an emergency application with the Ninth Circuit on October 25, seeking to block the ballots, but the panel denied the request.
What Happens Next?
With the ballots now set to be counted under California’s normal procedures, the DOJ retains the option to continue its legal challenge on the merits of the case. However, Judge Carter’s ruling suggests that the federal government’s arguments face significant hurdles. The DOJ could also pursue criminal prosecutions against individuals suspected of illegally voting, though no such cases have been publicly filed in connection with this dispute.
California election officials have stated that they will proceed with counting all ballots as scheduled, emphasizing that the state’s election procedures remain “secure and transparent.” The midterm elections are set to take place on November 3, with early voting already underway in California and other states.