Federal Judge Rejects Trump DOJ Bid to Segregate 20,000 California Mail Ballots

A federal judge on Wednesday, October 28, rejected the Trump administration’s emergency request to require California officials to separate roughly 20,000 mail ballots associated with people the government alleged were likely noncitizens. The ruling leaves the ballots subject to California’s normal verification and counting procedures.

U.S. District Judge David O. Carter said the Justice Department had not shown that its list was reliable enough to justify changing election procedures after voting was underway. No court has established that the people on the list are noncitizens or that they cast illegal ballots. Carter warned that the requested order could instead prevent eligible citizens from having their votes counted.

Judge questions the government’s evidence

The Justice Department filed the lawsuit on October 15 and asked Carter to order state officials to set aside vote-by-mail ballots from the identified voters until their citizenship could be confirmed. The department said federal agencies had compiled more than 20,000 names believed to be likely noncitizens. California challenged both the methodology and the accuracy of that claim.

Carter wrote that the government had offered vague descriptions of its procedures and that similar claims elsewhere had proved unreliable. He cited Nevada, where the Department of Homeland Security initially identified as many as 15,903 registered voters through what it called high-confidence matches. After further review, that figure fell first to 6,218 and then to 185; Nevada officials later found that all 185 were citizens, according to the ruling as quoted by NBC News.

“This Court will not deprive Californians who have met the requirements for voter registration of their fundamental right because of Plaintiff’s unfounded allegations,” Carter wrote. He also said the proposed order would disrupt an election already in progress, chill voters and election workers, and discount citizens’ votes.

Federal and state lawyers clashed over the remedy

At a hearing Tuesday, California attorney Christina McCall asked where the evidence was and described the federal allegations as vague and unreliable. Another state attorney, Anne Bellows, argued that forcing an unclear citizenship investigation shortly before an election would create a risk of disenfranchisement.

First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli argued that California could not simply count ballots after being alerted to possible noncitizens on its voter rolls. Carter responded that illegal voting is a crime and said federal prosecutors could bring cases against anyone supported by evidence rather than impose a blanket restriction on thousands of ballots.

The distinction is central to the ruling. Federal law prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections, but the administration’s list was an allegation generated through a matching process, not a judicial finding about each person’s citizenship or conduct. Carter concluded that the government had not supplied a credible basis for emergency relief that could affect eligible voters.

Ruling follows a failed emergency appeal

The decision came two days after a divided panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the administration’s earlier attempt to accelerate the dispute. That appellate ruling was procedural: the majority said it lacked jurisdiction because Carter had not yet decided the underlying request. Wednesday’s district-court order resolves that pending emergency application on its merits.

Carter wrote that states have longstanding constitutional authority over election administration and said the government’s last-minute request could allow political actors to create chaos in the voting process. The ruling does not validate illegal voting, and it does not prevent prosecutors from investigating or charging an individual case supported by evidence. It rejects the broader demand to segregate thousands of ballots on the record the administration presented.

The latest order is therefore a material new stage in the case rather than a repeat of the earlier appellate dispute. California can continue applying its ordinary ballot-verification rules while the underlying lawsuit proceeds through any remaining litigation.

Sources and image credit

• CalMatters — federal judge rejects the administration’s California ballot request
• NBC News — Carter declines to segregate ballots tied to alleged noncitizens
• TrumpInsight — earlier 9th Circuit procedural ruling in the same dispute
• Image: Sarah Stierch’s Sonoma mail-ballot photograph on Wikimedia Commons
• Original full-resolution Wikimedia Commons image

• Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license