Judge denies federal request to segregate California ballots, says it
would 'wreak havoc' on voting
[October 29, 2026]
By SAFIYAH RIDDLE
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A federal judge rejected on Wednesday a Trump
administration request to stop California from processing the ballots of
up to 20,000 people over allegations they are likely noncitizens,
warning it would “wreak havoc” on the midterm elections.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge David O. Carter comes as more than 3.7
million people have already voted in the state.
“Eroded trust in our democracy is irreparable. Once a vote is
segregated, lasting harm has occurred,” Carter wrote. “If the Executive
can discount votes and threaten an ongoing election due to unproven
allegations, then our democracy is in danger. This Court declines to be
a party to such process.”
Prosecutors for the Justice Department said they would immediately
appeal the decision.
The decision is the latest legal setback for President Donald Trump in
his efforts to expand federal control over state-run elections ahead of
voting that will decide control of Congress for the rest of his term.
The Republican administration sued election officials in the Democratic
state in mid-October, accusing the officials of failing to meet a
48-hour deadline to review a list of 20,000 people it alleged were
likely noncitizens on the state’s voter rolls. The administration had
asked the judge to require the state to wait to count those ballots
until the voters’ immigration status could be verified.
The Justice Department made a similar request in Washington state this
week for the state to sequester ballots submitted by hundreds of people
it suspects are not U.S. citizens. Meanwhile, another lawsuit filed in
Alaska last week seeks to delay certification of the vote if the
Republican incumbent running for U.S. Senate doesn’t win. All three
states have House or Senate races that will help determine the balance
of power in Congress.
Judge says Justice Department's request violates civil rights laws
Carter's order was a forceful rebuke of the federal government's demand,
arguing that segregating ballots at this time in the election would
require counties to develop new methods for sorting ballots and “risk
disenfranchising an untold number of voters.” In other words, Carter
argued, it would have the same effect as purging voters and therefore
violates the National Voting Rights Act, which prohibits changes to
voter rolls within 90 days of an election.
The federal government’s request, Carter wrote, “would wreak havoc and
disrupt the election that is already underway, create a chilling effect
on election workers and voters alike, and discount the votes of United
States citizens.”
California mails ballots to all 23 million registered voters. Court
filings show over 500,000 ballots had already been processed by this
week, meaning their envelopes had been verified and the ballots removed.
That would make it virtually impossible to know which ballot belonged to
a particular voter, Los Angeles county officials have testified.
Carter, an appointee of former Democratic President Bill Clinton, also
rejected the Justice Department's argument that California was impeding
the federal government's ability to enforce the law. He argued that
prosecutors already demonstrated the ability to enforce election law
when they arrested 28 noncitizens who had allegedly voted or registered
to vote illegally.
[to top of second column]
|
Carter previously said in court that he was inclined to appoint a
special master to vet the government's data processes. His Wednesday
order appeared to reverse course, and he did not establish one in
his order denying the Trump administration's demands.
Justice Department will appeal decision
The federal government said it would file an appeal in the case for
the second time on Wednesday evening. The USA's first appeal was
denied by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, since it preempted the
district court's decision. Two of the three judges also expressed
overwhelming skepticism about the merits of the lawsuit itself.
First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli doubled down on the
lawsuit's arguments Wednesday.
“Every day, more ballots are processed by election officials,”
Essayli wrote on social media following the ruling. “This ongoing
emergency disenfranchises American citizens through dilution.”
Essayli, who argued on behalf of the federal government on Tuesday,
has previously said the federal government’s request wouldn’t impede
the election. Instead, he argued that the Justice Department was
trying to prevent the “dilution” of the vote with noncitizen voters.
“Segregating a ballot does not prevent it from being counted later,"
Essayli said. "It is designed to preserve the status quo and prevent
the infection of our election with illegal ballots.”
California's decision echoes national trend
Election law experts following the case have said the ruling is
consistent with a broader change.
David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election
Innovation and Research, said the district court’s ruling “confirmed
what we already know: states, not the federal government, run
elections.”
He said the DOJ’s demands of California election officials, so close
to Election Day, seemed “designed to cause chaos.”
“But fortunately, the administration’s efforts to interfere with the
midterms are failing,” he said.
Jon Miller — the Chief Program Officer for the Public Rights
Project, a progressive civil rights organization that is
representing LA County officials — said that he considers
Wednesday’s ruling a “major victory for voters.” But he said that
his organization is still prepared for more challenges as part of
broader "efforts to undermine the election, undermine the
credibility of election officials and sow distrust in the electoral
process,” he said.
All contents © copyright 2026 Associated Press. All rights reserved
 |
