Supreme Court rejects Trump administration bid to block California ballots

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected an emergency request from the Trump administration to force California election officials to set aside approximately 20,000 mail-in ballots. The administration claims the ballots belong to noncitizens, but the high court declined to intervene, leaving intact lower court decisions that denied the request.

Legal Challenges and Judicial Rulings

The administration sought a "limited injunction" to prevent California from "commingling suspected illegal ballots with legal ones" until citizenship status could be verified, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Several lower court judges have ruled against the administration's efforts:

• U.S. District Judge David O. Carter previously denied a request to segregate the ballots, stating, "If the Executive can discount votes and threaten an ongoing election due to unproven allegations, then our democracy is in danger."
• Chief Judge James Boasberg ruled that the administration's demands likely violated the Constitution’s Elections Clause, writing, "The Executive Branch has likely violated the Constitution’s Elections Clause, which commits authority over election rules to the states and Congress alone."
• A 2-1 appeals court panel upheld Judge Carter's order, though one judge in a dissent argued that California's refusal to separate the ballots encourages a "violation of federal law."

Disputes Over Voter Lists

The dispute centers on a list of roughly 20,000 individuals compiled by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that the DOJ claims are noncitizens on California's voter rolls.

California officials and voting rights groups have challenged the accuracy of this list. Los Angeles County Clerk and Recorder Dean Logan stated, "The Department of Justice has not provided the underlying evidence, source, or methodology supporting its assertions that individuals identified in its records are ineligible to vote."

During a hearing, Kenneth Kao, a Justice Department attorney, told District Court Judge Trina Thompson, "That’s a fair statement," when asked if there was a high error rate in the data. However, Bill Essayli, the federal prosecutor for the DOJ's Los Angeles office, stated at a news conference that he was "highly confident the people on the list were not entitled to vote," though he later conceded there may be errors.

Election Context

The Supreme Court's decision comes on the eve of the U.S. midterm elections. In California, voting has been underway since early October, and all of the state's approximately 23 million registered voters are mailed a ballot. California election officials stated that finding and setting aside the challenged ballots at this stage would be "logistically impossible."

California Attorney General Rob Bonta described the appeal as "another attempt to undermine our elections and trample on the rule of law."

Why it matters

The ruling prevents a last-minute change to election procedures in California, a state that leans heavily Democratic. The decision follows a series of legal setbacks for the administration regarding its efforts to identify and restrict noncitizen voting in the current election cycle.

---

Sources

• ctvnews.ca: U.S. midterms: Trump admin pushes for California vote change
• washingtonexaminer.com: Supreme Court rejects DOJ bid to isolate California ballots
• dw.com: Supreme Court rejects Trump California midterm ballot bid
• deadline.com: Supreme Court Rejects Trump Request On California Noncitizens Voting
• theguardian.com: Supreme court rules against Trump over bid to force California to set aside ballots | US supreme court | 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.