A federal judge has ordered the Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security to stop informing election workers of potential prosecution for processing ballots from voters the administration suspects are noncitizens, while a separate appeals court ruling rejected a request to set aside approximately 20,000 California ballots.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
A federal judge in California issued an emergency order Friday, Oct. 30, prohibiting the Trump administration from informing state and local election officials of criminal prosecution for processing ballots belonging to registered voters whose citizenship the federal government has questioned.
U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson of the Northern District of California ruled that the Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security had likely violated federal election law by pressuring officials to halt ballot processing or separate ballots associated with individuals identified by federal investigators as potentially ineligible voters.
The ruling came just four days before the Nov. 3 midterm elections and followed Justice Department letters demanding that California election officials cooperate with federal citizenship verification efforts.
According to NBC News’ reporting on the decision, Thompson granted a temporary restraining order after labor unions and civil rights organizations challenged the administration’s demands.
The lawsuit was brought by the Service Employees International Union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the League of United Latin American Citizens and the NAACP.
In her eight-page order issued Oct. 30, Thompson described the federal government’s conduct as an effort to pressure election workers who were carrying out their responsibilities under existing election procedures.
“In the lead-up to the election, high-ranking DOJ and DHS officials have engaged in a campaign to intimidate, threaten, and coerce state and local officials and employees who are engaged in administering the ongoing midterm 2026 election,” the order stated, recounting the allegations presented by the plaintiffs.
The court found that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claims that the administration’s conduct violated the Voting Rights Act’s prohibition against intimidation, threats or coercion in connection with voting.
“Although Defendants claim that their actions are designed to halt unlawful voting by noncitizens, their actions are likely to have the effect of interfering with election administration and disenfranchising lawful voters,” the order stated, describing the plaintiffs’ allegations.
Thompson prohibited federal officials from pressuring election workers to stop processing ballots solely because the administration alleges that the registered voters who submitted them are ineligible.
The order also bars demands that election officials remove specific registered voters from voter rolls, refuse to issue them ballots or segregate their ballots based solely on the federal government’s allegations concerning their eligibility.
Federal officials are additionally prohibited from threatening criminal prosecution against election workers who refuse those demands or process ballots in compliance with state and federal election laws.
The temporary restrictions extend through 5 p.m. Nov. 16, nearly two weeks after Election Day.
The judge also directed the Justice Department to disclose pending search warrant applications, grand jury subpoenas and other demands involving election materials or ballots connected to the government’s lists of suspected ineligible voters.
Federal authorities must notify state and local governments that previously received the disputed letters that the demands and prosecution threats contained in those communications have been temporarily prohibited.
The confrontation stems from an investigation conducted by federal immigration and law enforcement agencies into approximately 20,000 California voter registrations.
The Trump administration maintains that its investigators identified individuals who are likely noncitizens but remain registered to vote in federal elections.
Federal law prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections, and the Justice Department has argued that California officials must take appropriate steps to prevent ballots cast by ineligible individuals from being counted.
On Oct. 13, federal officials demanded that California Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Los Angeles County election officials separate ballots associated with individuals on the government’s list until their citizenship could be verified.
When California officials refused, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit Oct. 15 seeking emergency court intervention.
The administration subsequently expanded its demands to election officials across California.
Federal prosecutors sent letters to officials in 57 of California’s 58 counties, warning about potential criminal liability for processing ballots belonging to individuals the government believes are ineligible.
A letter sent to San Bernardino County election officials Oct. 22 emphasized the federal prohibition against noncitizen voting.
“As you’re aware, federal law prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections,” the letter stated.
“I write to seek your help to protect the integrity of the ongoing federal election.”
First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli also identified more than 1,000 registered voters in San Bernardino County whom federal investigators classified as likely noncitizens.
“Within 48 hours, we ask that you commit to working with DOJ and DHS to identify who on the accompanying list is a citizen and who is not,” Essayli wrote.
The department sought access to nonpublic voter registration information, potentially including Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers and state identification records.
“That means sending us the nonpublic information associated with each suspected alien’s registration,” Essayli wrote.
The government also requested that ballots associated with individuals whose citizenship could not be confirmed be separated from other ballots.
“For individuals whom citizenship status cannot be confirmed, we request that you immediately instruct the appropriate elections official to segregate—not cancel—those individuals’ vote-by-mail ballots until their citizenship status can be determined.”
The administration argued that separating the ballots would preserve the opportunity to determine voter eligibility before the ballots were removed from their identifying envelopes and counted.
A social media post circulating during the dispute highlighted the government’s arguments about potential voter fraud and the consequences of counting ballots before citizenship verification is completed.
The Justice Department maintains that once a ballot is separated from its identifying envelope and incorporated into the vote count, election officials generally cannot determine how that particular voter voted.
Essayli criticized California’s refusal to follow the federal government’s requests.
“California election officials were given an opportunity to remove noncitizens from their voter rolls and to sequester ballots returned from suspected ineligible voters. They refused,” he said.
California officials disputed the accuracy of the federal list and argued that the proposed procedures could interfere with lawful voting.
The state maintained that the names identified by federal investigators had not been conclusively established as belonging to noncitizens and that some individuals on the list appeared to be eligible American voters.
A separate legal dispute over those ballots reached the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday.
In a 2-1 decision, the appellate panel rejected the Justice Department’s request to require California to set aside ballots associated with approximately 20,000 registered voters while their citizenship status was investigated.
The appeals court decision, reported by The Epoch Times, followed an earlier district court ruling denying the administration’s request for emergency relief.
Judges Mark Bennett and Gabriel Sanchez concluded that federal officials had not demonstrated sufficient grounds for the requested intervention.
The majority warned that forcing California to identify and separate thousands of ballots during an ongoing election could disrupt ballot processing and potentially prevent eligible citizens from having their votes counted.
The judges declined the administration’s “invitation to contravene the Elections Clause by undermining the Constitution’s plain text.”
“If the United States believes different procedures are necessary for vote-by-mail ballots, we believe it should take that suggestion to Congress, not the courts,” the ruling stated.
The majority also agreed with the district court’s assessment of the practical consequences of separating individual ballots.
“As the district court found—and we discern no clear error—there is no feasible way to identify and segregate the ballots of specific individuals without potentially catastrophic effects on the entire system.”
Judge Patrick Bumatay dissented, arguing that the government’s request represented a reasonable effort to preserve disputed ballots until citizenship verification could be completed.
The appellate ruling did not establish that every individual identified by the Justice Department is eligible to vote. Instead, it addressed whether the government had demonstrated sufficient grounds for an emergency order requiring California to change its election procedures.
A second social media post discussing the court decisions addressed the administration’s attempt to prevent disputed ballots from being counted before verification.
The two Friday decisions involved separate lawsuits but addressed related questions about federal authority over election administration.
Thompson’s temporary restraining order specifically concerns threats, demands and potential criminal prosecution directed at election workers. The Ninth Circuit’s ruling addresses the government’s request for an emergency injunction requiring California to separate disputed ballots.
Neither decision changes the federal prohibition against noncitizen voting or prevents law enforcement from investigating credible allegations of election fraud through lawful procedures.
The dispute centers on whether federal authorities can compel state election officials to depart from established ballot-processing procedures based on allegations that particular registered voters lack citizenship.
In explaining the urgency of her order, Thompson emphasized that voting and ballot processing were already underway.
“Election Day is around the corner. Ballots have already been issued. Americans have already begun voting. Workers have already begun processing ballots. Given the consequences of inaction, the Court sees no reason to delay its ruling.”
The federal government must submit its response to the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction by noon Nov. 2. Thompson scheduled a hearing for Nov. 13, three days before the temporary restraining order expires.
California election officials may continue processing ballots under existing state and federal procedures while the lawsuits proceed, and the Justice Department’s allegations concerning the disputed voter registrations remain unresolved.
Original article
Comments