Full Breakdown
Federal Appeals Court Scrutinizes DOJ’s Emergency Bid to Segregate 20,000 California Mail-In Ballots
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event
On October 15, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California seeking an emergency injunction that would require California election officials to set aside roughly 20,000 mail-in ballots the administration alleges were sent to likely non-citizen voters. The DOJ argued that processing those ballots without verification would “dilute” the votes of U.S. citizens. After the district judge delayed a ruling, the DOJ appealed to the Ninth Circuit on October 22 and asked the panel to intervene before the scheduled district-court hearing.
Background & Context
The suit is part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to intervene in state-run elections during the 2026 midterm cycle, with similar actions taken in Alaska and other states. The DOJ’s claim rests on a federal criminal statute that makes it a misdemeanor for a non-citizen to vote, but it does not expressly grant the executive branch authority to dictate how states process ballots. California law already requires voters to attest to citizenship under penalty of perjury, and the state maintains that its safeguards are “robust.”
Official Statements & Responses
Justice Department: Attorney Matthew Donnelly told the panel that the list was “purchased” from California and that “rigorous” third-party software matched the voter data against federal citizenship records. He argued the emergency request was necessary because waiting could allow “untraceable disenfranchisement.”
California: Deputy Attorney General Samuel Siegel said the state’s statutes already require citizenship attestation and that the DOJ’s request “would short-circuit the democratic process” while the election is underway.
Judicial Panel: Circuit Judge Mark J. Bennett questioned the court’s jurisdiction and the constitutional basis for the injunction, asking “How can we do that?” when pressed on the Elections Clause. Judge Gabriel P. Sanchez focused on the reliability of the DOJ’s list, stating “Your claims very much depend on the reliability of that list.” Judge Patrick J. Bumatay noted that without an injunction “you will never know” whether non-citizen ballots have been cast.
Criticism & Opposition
California Governor Gavin Newsom called the suit “a sad, desperate attempt … to suppress California voters.” Legal scholars such as UCLA professor Rick Hasen warned that the suit violates the “Purcell principle” by seeking relief weeks before an election and that the DOJ’s reliance on a criminal statute does not confer authority to commandeer state election administration.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Sources differ on the exact number of ballots already processed in Los Angeles County—CNN cites “more than 300,000,” Fox News reports 331,000, and ABC News notes 330,000. The DOJ has not disclosed the identity of the third-party vendor that supplied the list, and judges repeatedly pressed Donnelly for details, leaving the methodology largely unverified.
What’s Next
The Ninth Circuit panel indicated it will issue a ruling “as quickly as possible.” The district-court hearing on the DOJ’s emergency request is set for later this month. Depending on the appellate decision, the case may be remanded for fact-finding or dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, with potential implications for other pending DOJ election lawsuits.