Reported by 3 sources

The short version

  • The DOJ filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to enjoin California from tabulating ballots from over 20,000 individuals identified as likely noncitizens.
  • State officials refused to review a list provided by the DOJ on a USB drive, citing security concerns and lack of methodology transparency.
  • The legal challenge occurs amid broader scrutiny of federal efforts to identify noncitizen voters, with previous DHS data facing criticism for flawed methodologies.

The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against the state of California, seeking a court order to prevent the tabulation of certain ballots cast in the upcoming midterm elections. The federal government alleges that more than 20,000 individuals on the voter rolls are likely noncitizens and is asking the court to set aside their vote-by-mail ballots until their citizenship status can be verified. This legal action represents a significant escalation in the ongoing conflict between federal authorities and state election officials over voter eligibility.

The lawsuit was filed in federal court in the central district of California two days after the Justice Department made an urgent demand to Los Angeles County election officials. On Tuesday, the department sent a thumb drive containing a handwritten password to Dean Logan, the county clerk and recorder. The drive purported to contain names of noncitizens registered to vote. The DOJ requested that officials confirm the citizenship of anyone on the list and set aside ballots from those whose status could not be confirmed, giving the state only 48 hours to act.

News Journal

Los Angeles County officials refused to review the list. Logan stated that his office would not examine the data, in part because they did not consider the USB drive secure. Furthermore, the Justice Department did not provide details on how it compiled the names or verify the accuracy of the information. California Secretary of State Shirley Weber criticized the federal government’s actions, stating that the DOJ had not provided the list to her office and that such efforts serve only to cause chaos and fuel public distrust in elections.

In its complaint, Justice Department lawyers argued that the court should enjoin California from tabulating vote-by-mail ballots from likely noncitizens. They requested an order for the state to independently verify citizenship status beyond the unverified statements required during registration. The lawsuit highlights a fundamental disagreement over jurisdiction and procedure: while the federal government asserts authority to challenge voter eligibility, state officials maintain that they have not received credible evidence or secure data to act upon.

This legal maneuver comes amid broader concerns about potential interference in the counting of votes in the midterm elections. Republicans are expected to lose seats in Congress, raising stakes for both parties. The Trump administration’s methodology for identifying noncitizens has faced intense scrutiny. Earlier this year, the Department of Homeland Security claimed there could be as many as 278,000 noncitizens on voter rolls in four states, including more than 190,000 in California.

However, previous attempts by federal agencies to share such data have been met with skepticism. In Nevada, DHS officials refused to share their methodology with election officials and later turned over only 185 names of people they strongly believed were noncitizens. When Nevada officials investigated those names, they found no evidence of fraud. This history casts doubt on the reliability of the current list provided by the DOJ and raises questions about the political motivations behind the lawsuit.

The request to block tabulation is unprecedented in its timing and scope. By seeking to halt the counting process before results are finalized, the Justice Department is attempting to intervene directly in the election administration process. Critics argue that this move undermines confidence in the electoral system and sets a dangerous precedent for federal interference in state-run elections. The narrow 48-hour window given to Los Angeles County further exacerbated tensions, leaving little time for due diligence.

The outcome of this lawsuit could have far-reaching implications for election integrity debates in the United States. If the court grants the injunction, it would establish a mechanism for federal challenges to voter eligibility based on unverified lists. Conversely, if the court rejects the suit, it would reinforce state authority over election administration and reject federal attempts to purge voter rolls without substantial evidence. The case underscores the deep political divisions surrounding voting rights and access.

As the legal battle unfolds, attention remains focused on whether the Justice Department can substantiate its claims with verifiable data. The lack of transparency regarding the source and methodology of the 20,000 names continues to fuel criticism from election experts and civil rights advocates. The situation highlights the fragility of public trust in elections when legal challenges are perceived as politically motivated rather than evidence-based.

The next steps depend on the federal court’s ruling. If an injunction is issued, California may be forced to pause tabulation for specific ballots, potentially delaying results and complicating the certification process. Regardless of the outcome, the lawsuit has already intensified scrutiny of voter registration practices and federal-state relations in election administration. The incident serves as a flashpoint in the ongoing national debate over voting security and accessibility.

Sources behind this briefing

Go to the original reporting