California Gov. Gavin Newsom has warned federal judges that the Trump administration could seek warrants to confiscate election materials before vote counting and certification are complete, escalating a legal dispute over alleged noncitizen voter registrations.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
California Gov. Gavin Newsom has urged federal judges to closely scrutinize any attempt by President Donald Trump’s administration to seize ballots or voting equipment during the Nov. 3 midterm elections, warning that such actions could disrupt the counting of votes and certification of election results.
In an Oct. 31 letter addressed to the chief judges of California’s four federal district courts, Newsom expressed concern that the Department of Justice might pursue criminal search warrants to obtain election materials following a series of legal disputes over federal demands for state voter records.
According to a Reuters report published Nov. 1, the warning followed an Oct. 30 federal appeals court decision rejecting the administration’s attempt to obtain California election records in connection with an investigation into alleged noncitizen voting.
“Given the United States Department of Justice’s persistence in advancing this baseless theory of criminal liability, I have grave concerns federal agents will seek search warrants to seize ballots and ballot materials before the election results are certified,” Newsom wrote.
The Democratic governor argued that California’s existing laws governing ballot preservation, documentation and chain of custody already provide safeguards for investigating potential election irregularities. He maintained that confiscating ballots or tabulation equipment before certification would interfere with election administration rather than serve a legitimate investigative purpose.
In his letter, Newsom argued that the only reason to pursue such seizures would be to interfere with the state’s “lawful counting of ballots and certifying the results of the election.”
Newsom acknowledged that he was unaware of any pending applications for warrants to seize election materials. His letter was intended to alert judges to potential legal disputes before voting concludes and California begins the certification process, scheduled to be completed by Dec. 11.
The governor’s concerns arise from an ongoing confrontation between California officials and the Justice Department over allegations that individuals who are not U.S. citizens have been included on the state’s voter registration rolls.
The Trump administration has alleged that more than 20,000 noncitizens are registered to vote in California. State officials and election experts have challenged the reliability of the information underlying those allegations, while the Justice Department has not established how many individuals identified in its records, if any, actually cast ballots.
California officials have characterized the federal government’s information as “suspect data” and warned that complying with certain federal demands could jeopardize the voting rights of eligible residents.
Under the U.S. Constitution, states are primarily responsible for administering elections, subject to applicable federal law. The federal government also has authority to investigate potential violations of federal election statutes, including illegal voting and other election-related offenses.
The dispute has already resulted in several federal court proceedings. On Oct. 30, a federal appeals court rejected the administration’s request for California election records, potentially leaving the disagreement for consideration by the U.S. Supreme Court.
In a separate proceeding, a federal judge ordered the Justice Department to stop threatening criminal prosecution against California state and local election officials who declined to comply with federal election-related demands.
Newsom’s letter cited Acting Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter, who had communicated warnings about possible legal consequences to election officials, and Bilal Essayli, first assistant U.S. attorney for the Central District of California, who had publicly discussed potential prosecutions involving ballots allegedly cast by noncitizens.
The governor also referred to federal grand jury subpoenas issued to Los Angeles County election workers and continuing criminal investigations involving officials who resisted federal requests for election records.
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, who has overseen litigation involving the federal government and California, previously advised that it “would be wise that any threats to state and county elected employees cease immediately.”
Newsom contended that federal investigators might turn to criminal proceedings after encountering resistance in civil litigation. That concern remains a prediction by the governor, rather than confirmation that federal authorities intend to confiscate ballots.
To support his request, Newsom provided the judges with a September 2026 resource prepared by the University of California, Berkeley’s Edley Center on Law & Democracy. The document, titled “Questions for Assessing a Search Warrant for Election Materials,” addresses considerations for courts evaluating applications involving election records, ballots and related equipment.
Newsom asked that federal judges consider the potential consequences of removing election materials while state officials are conducting legally required vote counting and certification procedures.
The governor also raised concerns about possible effects on congressional races, arguing that interference with certification could have national political consequences if the election changes control of either chamber of Congress.
The Justice Department’s allegations concerning noncitizen registration remain disputed, and the existence of such registrations would not by itself establish that illegal ballots had been cast.
With Election Day scheduled for Tuesday, Nov. 3, Newsom’s warning places additional attention on the federal courts’ potential role in resolving disputes involving election records, criminal investigations and the authority of state officials to complete the vote-counting process.
Original article
Comments