In a federal courtroom in Los Angeles, a judge has declined to let the national government reach into a state's ballot count and set aside thousands of votes on the strength of unverified suspicions. The ruling reflects an old and enduring tension in American life, between the federal reach over elections and the states' long-held authority to run their own. It arrives at a moment when trust in the machinery of voting is fragile, and when the voices of citizens who have done everything asked of them must be weighed against lists whose origins remain partly hidden. For now the count goes on, an
Judge Rejects DOJ Bid to Segregate Up to 20,000 California Mail Ballots Mid-Count
A list on a thumb drive, a password on a post-it, and 48 hours to act
Mark
Start with the basics. What exactly did the Justice Department want?
Mimi
To set aside up to 20,000 mail ballots in California while counting was underway, so voters' citizenship could be checked. Judge Carter refused and said it would disrupt an election already in progress.
Mark
Where did the 20,000 figure come from?
Mimi
DHS gave state officials a list of 20,000 supposed high-confidence matches on a thumb drive, with a handwritten password, and allowed 48 hours to act. The DOJ's suit rested on a purchased voter list matched with other government data.
Luke
Careful with "high confidence." That's the government's label. The method hasn't been disclosed, so we can't verify it.
Mimi
Right. What we do have is early checking by local officials. They found many names not on the rolls or in suspended status, meaning no mail ballot would have gone out.
Luke
And the claim that some are US-born?
Mimi
That comes from local officials' indications. DHS disputed it in court declarations, so it's contested, not settled.
Mark
Why does the judge's point about prosecutions matter?
Mimi
He said the DOJ can already prosecute noncitizens who vote illegally, and it hadn't explained how continued counting harms that. It undercuts the emergency argument.
Luke
Worth noting that's one ruling. An appeal is likely, and we don't know how a higher court will see it.
Mark
And the wider stakes?
Mimi
Washington state got a similar list, and three other Democratic-led states faced sweeping claims. Experts see California as a test of federal reach.
O Pulso
- A federal judge in Los Angeles has blocked the Justice Department from pulling up to 20,000 mail ballots aside for citizenship checks mid-count.
- The DOJ's case rests on a purchased voter list and DHS data matching, a foundation that officials say is riddled with names not on the rolls or suspended.
- Local election officials are sorting through the flagged names, finding many who were never eligible to receive a mail ballot and some who were born in the United States.
- The judge's order warns of chilling effects on election workers and voters, and points out that federal prosecution remains available if noncitizen voting is real.
- An appeal is expected, and with the California count still underway, the case is being watched nationally as a test of federal power over state ballot counting.
In a federal courtroom in Los Angeles, a judge has declined to let the national government reach into a state's ballot count and set aside thousands of votes on the strength of unverified suspicions. The ruling reflects an old and enduring tension in American life, between the federal reach over elections and the states' long-held authority to run their own. It arrives at a moment when trust in the machinery of voting is fragile, and when the voices of citizens who have done everything asked of them must be weighed against lists whose origins remain partly hidden. For now the count goes on, and the question of how far federal power may travel into that count is only beginning its journey upward.
A federal judge in Los Angeles has told the Justice Department it cannot pull as many as 20,000 California mail ballots aside for citizenship checks. Judge David O. Carter, a Clinton appointee, issued a 26-page order the day after a lengthy hearing, writing that the request would "wreak havoc and disrupt the election that is already underway."
The Justice Department's emergency suit was built on a purchased list of California voters, matched against other government data. The administration has kept its methods largely secret. In July, the Department of Homeland Security claimed 190,000 registered voters could be ineligible, then handed state officials a list of 20,000 "high confidence" matches on a thumb drive, with the password written on a sticky note, and gave them 48 hours to act before suing.
Local officials who reviewed the list found many names were not on their rolls or were suspended, meaning those people would never receive a ballot. Others appeared to be native-born citizens. Carter wrote that voters who met registration requirements "must not be deprived of a core right merely because of unfounded allegations." He also noted that federal prosecution of illegal voting remains available to the government.
The stakes extend beyond California. The department has sent similar lists to Washington state and made broad claims about three other Democratic-led states. Election law experts see the case as a test of how far federal authority can go in disputing a state's count. An appeal is likely, and for now the count continues.
A federal judge in Los Angeles has told the Justice Department it cannot reach into California's mail-ballot count and pull aside as many as 20,000 ballots for citizenship checks. Judge David O. Carter of the Central District of California issued a 26-page order the day after a lengthy hearing. He wrote that the request would "wreak havoc and disrupt the election that is already underway."
Carter, a Clinton appointee, said the administration's attempt to question whether thousands of the state's voters are noncitizens would violate California's right to run its own election. He also said it would compromise decades of voting and civil rights protections. Voters who have met the state's registration requirements, he wrote, "must not be deprived of a core right merely because of unfounded allegations stemming from a procedure rife with uncertainty and errors." He added that the request would "create a chilling effect on election workers and voters alike, and discount the votes of United States citizens."
The Justice Department had brought an emergency lawsuit built on what it described as a purchased list of California voters, matched against other government data. The administration has kept key details secret about how it analyzed that list and concluded that thousands of people on it could be noncitizens. In July, the Department of Homeland Security claimed that 190,000 registered California voters could be ineligible foreigners. The agency then gave state election officials a list of 20,000 supposedly "high confidence" matches, delivered on a thumb drive with the password handwritten on a post-it note. It gave the state 48 hours to act, and then filed suit.
Local election officials have since done an early review of the list. They found that a significant portion of the names are either not on their rolls or are in a suspended status, which means those people would not receive a mail ballot at all. They also saw indications that some people the DOJ labeled likely noncitizens are in fact born in the United States. DHS officials disputed that in declarations to the court.
Carter also pointed out that the Justice Department already has its own tool for fighting illegal voting: federal prosecution of noncitizens accused of voting unlawfully. "The United States does not explain why Defendants continuing to count ballots impairs any present or future [illegal voting] prosecution," he wrote. "Federal law is enforced by the federal government. State participation (or lack thereof) in that enforcement does not bear on how the federal government chooses to allocate its own resources or officers."
The case reaches beyond California. For months, the administration had previewed plans to assemble lists of people it thinks could be unlawfully registered, using controversial federal data-matching programs. It would hand those lists to election officials with threats of prosecution or other legal action if they did not act. Since filing the California suit, the Justice Department has presented a similar list to Washington state election officials. Earlier this year it made sweeping claims about noncitizens registered to vote in three other Democratic-led states. Election law experts have widely viewed the California case as a test of how far the department might go to disrupt or dispute a state's ballot counting.
An appeal is likely. A previous DOJ attempt to leapfrog Carter's court and get appellate review of the case failed earlier this week. For now, the count in California continues.
Citações Notáveis
Individuals who have met the requirements of California's voter registration laws must not be deprived of a core right merely because of unfounded allegations stemming from a procedure rife with uncertainty and errors.— Judge David O. Carter, in his order
The request would wreak havoc and disrupt the election that is already underway.— Judge David O. Carter
Quer a matéria completa?
Leia o original em Cable News Network ↗
Politics & Governance