A federal judge has rejected an emergency request from the Justice Department to segregate approximately 20,000 mail-in ballots in California. The Trump administration sought a temporary restraining order to stop the processing of ballots belonging to individuals it claims are "likely" noncitizens during the midterm elections.

Why was the request denied?

U.S. District Judge David Carter ruled that the federal government's attempt to interfere with the ongoing election process would "wreak havoc" and cause significant disruption. The judge expressed concern that the administration's request violated constitutional principles that grant states control over their own election procedures.

Read also Appeals Court Questions DOJ Bid to Segregate California Ballots

Carter also questioned the reliability of the government's data. He noted that in a similar case in Nevada, federal officials initially flagged thousands of voters as noncitizens, only to later find that the vast majority were actually legal citizens. The judge warned that once a vote is segregated, "lasting harm has occurred."

What is the context of these allegations?

The Justice Department filed its suit on October 15, accusing California of failing to review a list of alleged noncitizens. While the administration claims it has identified a significant number of ineligible voters, the judge pointed to a lack of credible evidence in the government's procedures.

California officials have pushed back strongly against the claims. They noted that a preliminary analysis by Los Angeles County showed many individuals on the federal list do not even have active voter registrations. Furthermore, state leaders argued that the attempt to intervene just days before Election Day would be both unlawful and technically impossible to execute without disenfranchising legitimate citizens.

What are the arguments from both sides?

The Justice Department argued that California must comply with federal laws that prohibit noncitizens from voting. Officials stated they had identified a list of individuals who likely do not hold citizenship status.

California officials countered the claim by stating:

  • The federal list is unreliable and lacks evidence.
  • Preliminary local analyses show many listed individuals lack active voter registrations.
  • Segregating ballots so close to Election Day would be unlawful and technically infeasible.
  • The move would disenfranchise eligible voters.

What happens next?

While the request to stop the current ballot processing was denied, the judge noted that the federal government can still pursue legal action by indicting individuals for the crime of illegal voting. California Attorney General Rob Bonta indicated that the state will continue to fight the lawsuit to protect its election sovereignty.