Judge orders DOJ to stop demanding California officials set aside 20,000 ballots

A federal judge on Monday ordered the Trump administration to stop demanding that California election officials set aside ballots from approximately 20,000 people the Justice Department suspects may be noncitizens.

Judicial Ruling

Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg in Washington found the administration likely exceeded its constitutional authority by pressing state officials to separate the disputed ballots ahead of Tuesday’s midterm elections.

“The Executive Branch has likely violated the Constitution’s Elections Clause, which commits authority over election rules to the states and Congress alone,” Boasberg wrote in a 20-page decision.

The ruling follows a separate order from Friday by U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson in California, which barred federal officials from threatening election workers with prosecution over knowingly counting illegal votes. Thompson's order addressed demands to remove voters, refuse ballots, or segregate votes based on federal allegations of noncitizenship.

DOJ Prosecution and Litigation

On Monday, the administration asked the Supreme Court to order California to set aside the ballots while litigation proceeds. The Supreme Court denied that application hours after Boasberg’s ruling.

In a separate development, Bill Essayli, the US attorney for the central district of California, announced on Monday that his office was prosecuting six lawful permanent residents accused of unlawfully registering to vote and casting fraudulent ballots. The six defendants include people originally from Mexico, Israel, the Philippines, Canada and Iran. All six are accused of a single charge each of making false statements on a naturalization application.

The DOJ maintains the ballots should be separated until officials can verify the voters’ citizenship. Bill Essayli stated that the government used “third-party databases” to identify potentially fraudulent voters and that while it “may not be 100%” accurate, there was a “very, very high confidence rate.”

Arguments from Plaintiffs and State Officials

The litigation was brought by the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), the UCLA Voting Rights Project, and California voter Pedro Trujillo. The plaintiffs argue that federal efforts to identify suspected noncitizens through database matching risk wrongly flagging naturalized citizens.

California officials contend the government’s list contains substantial errors and likely includes eligible citizens. They argue the demands would disrupt an election in which millions of votes have already been cast. An immigrant rights group analyzed the list of 20,000 names and stated in a filing that more than 40% of the people flagged could not be found on the state’s voter rolls.

Why it matters

• The dispute involves the intersection of federal oversight and state authority over election rules.
• The DOJ is pursuing criminal charges against individuals accused of making false statements on naturalization applications.
• The litigation occurs during the midterm election period, involving approximately 20,000 names out of more than 23 million registered voters in California.

---

Sources

• washingtonexaminer.com: Judge orders DOJ to halt demands to isolate 20,000 California ballots
• theguardian.com: Trump’s DoJ charges six more people in ‘voter fraud’ crackdown in California | California | The Guardian

This article was drafted with AI assistance and checked against the sources above. Company claims are reported as claims. Cover image is AI-generated.