The short version
- A California county official rejected a federal demand to set aside ballots from alleged noncitizens after finding the provided data contained numerous errors and missing information.
- The Department of Justice threatened criminal prosecution for election officials who count ballots from individuals identified as ineligible, escalating tensions between state and federal authorities.
- State leaders argue the federal campaign relies on unreliable data and lacks legal authority to interfere with local election administration during the midterm cycle.
A California county elections official has publicly rejected a demand from the Department of Justice to segregate ballots cast by individuals alleged to be noncitizens, citing severe deficiencies in the federal government's evidence. Keaton Denlay, the clerk-recorder and registrar of voters for Butte County, stated that he would not act on a list provided by federal agents because it was riddled with inaccuracies and lacked the specificity required under state law to challenge voter eligibility.
The confrontation occurred late in the midterm election cycle, as federal prosecutors intensified their scrutiny of voting records across California. On Friday afternoon, an individual identifying himself as a Department of Homeland Security agent delivered paperwork to Denlay’s office. The package included a demand letter signed by Eric Grant, the U.S. attorney for the eastern district of California, along with declarations and a two-page list of names purportedly belonging to unlawful voters.
The federal letter asserted that the document contained 47 likely noncitizens who were unlawfully registered to vote. It demanded that Denlay’s office provide additional information on these individuals, such as Social Security numbers, and instructed him to segregate their vote-by-mail ballots pending a determination of citizenship status. The correspondence carried a stern warning, stating that officials who knowingly tabulate ballots from identified noncitizens risk becoming aiders and abettors to a federal crime.
Denlay found the underlying data to be fundamentally flawed. He reported that the list provided was poorly formatted, appearing as a disorganized printout with missing and jumbled information. Contrary to the letter’s claim of 47 names, the document actually contained only 46 entries, with one name repeated twice. Furthermore, Denlay noted that the two pages were identical copies, offering no additional data despite the federal assertion of a comprehensive list.
Upon cross-referencing the names with Butte County’s active voter rolls, Denlay discovered that 32 of the 45 distinct individuals listed were not registered to vote in the county and had not received ballots. Seven other entries lacked sufficient identifying information, such as partial names or addresses, missing dates of birth, or absent driver’s license and Social Security digits. This left only six names that might potentially correspond to ineligible voters, a fraction of the total alleged by federal prosecutors.
Under California law, anyone challenging a voter’s eligibility bears the burden of establishing extraordinary proof of the challenge’s validity at the time it is made. Denlay concluded that the Department of Justice had not met this high standard given the overall inaccuracy and lack of specificity in the provided list. He emphasized that his duty is to uphold his oath and support the voters of Butte County, stating he would continue performing his job without succumbing to what he described as absurd threats.
This incident reflects a broader conflict between state election administrators and federal prosecutors. The Department of Justice has alleged that approximately 20,000 voters in California are likely noncitizens and has filed lawsuits to prevent those ballots from being counted. State officials have strongly rejected these claims, arguing that the federal government is using unreliable data and risking the disenfranchisement of U.S. citizens while overstepping its authority.
In recent days, the Justice Department escalated its tactics by sending letters directly to county registrars across the state, demanding responses within 48 hours. These actions have sparked criticism from legal observers and a federal judge weighing the department’s lawsuit, who rebuked the threats against local election officials. As the election concludes, the dispute highlights ongoing tensions over the role of federal agencies in overseeing state-run voting processes.
Denlay published a detailed statement on the county website outlining the chaos and confusion wrought by the federal campaign. He noted that the demand letter even misspelled his last name, further underscoring the sloppiness of the operation. While a spokesperson for the U.S. attorney’s office declined to comment on Denlay’s specific account, the incident serves as a case study in the friction between federal enforcement efforts and local election integrity measures.
The outcome in Butte County may influence how other jurisdictions respond to similar federal demands. With the midterm elections nearing their conclusion, the focus shifts to whether any ballots were ultimately affected by these disputes and what legal precedents might emerge from the Department of Justice’s aggressive stance. For now, local officials like Denlay remain steadfast in their refusal to compromise administrative standards based on flawed federal data.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- The Guardian US Politics↗California election official says federal agents threatened him over ‘voter fraud’
