After a judge said the government could “go out and indict,” the Justice Department charged 28 lawful permanent residents in California over alleged false citizenship claims tied to voter registration and, in many cases, voting.
Story Snapshot
- Justice Department filed criminal cases against 28 lawful permanent residents, arresting 11.
- A federal judge denied a broad ballot freeze but noted prosecutions could continue.
- Federal officials also sued California over a list of more than 20,000 “likely” noncitizen registrants.
- Critics say the big list risks sweeping in naturalized citizens and has errors.
What Prosecutors Say Happened
The Justice Department said 28 foreign nationals who are lawful permanent residents were charged for election crimes in California. Prosecutors allege the defendants lied under oath on voter registration forms by claiming they were United States citizens. The department said many then cast ballots. The charges include fraudulent voter registration and false statements in naturalization applications, each carrying up to five years in prison if convicted. Eleven defendants were arrested, and cases were filed as individual criminal complaints.
These criminal filings followed a related civil push. Federal officials sued California days earlier, saying a review flagged more than 20,000 people as “likely” noncitizens on the state’s voter rolls. The department asked a court to stop counting mail ballots tied to those names until citizenship could be checked. The filing stated the list came from federal and state data reviews and was shared with California for action before the election.
How The Court Drew A Line
United States District Judge David Carter denied the Justice Department’s emergency request to halt processing ballots linked to the 20,000-name list. He said the government could keep addressing the issue case by case through indictments and prosecutions for illegal voting. The ruling limited any immediate statewide ballot action but did not stop targeted criminal cases like the 28 now charged. The court’s stance pushed the fight away from bulk list remedies and toward person-specific proof.
The judge’s order also spotlighted transparency fights over the list. Another court directed the government to provide the underlying names to lawyers for outside groups for review, and the department said it would appeal. Until the list and methods are fully disclosed and tested, outside parties cannot easily verify how many, if any, flagged people were in fact noncitizens at the time of registration or voting.
Why The 20,000-Name List Is Disputed
California leaders and voting-rights experts questioned the list’s accuracy. Reporting found that some people on the list appeared to be United States-born, while the UCLA Voting Rights Project warned that the matching process could wrongly flag naturalized citizens. Critics said database mismatches and out-of-date records often produce false hits, especially near elections when reviews are rushed. These concerns challenge the list’s value as proof of widespread illegal voting, even if some individual cases are valid.
Process concerns also fed mistrust. Reports said the federal government provided the list to local officials on a password-protected thumb drive and pressed for a quick, 48-hour review. That fast timeline, combined with lawsuit pressure, made some officials see the move as interference in state election operations. The judge’s refusal to segregate ballots underscored the courts’ caution about sweeping steps without verified, person-level evidence.
What Is Known Versus What Is Not
Two firm facts stand out. First, the 28 charged individuals are lawful permanent residents, not United States citizens, according to the Justice Department, and prosecutors say many lied on sworn registration forms and, in many cases, voted. Second, the larger 20,000-name list is only a set of “likely” noncitizens, not a verified roster of lawbreakers. Questions remain about who exactly is on that list, who actually registered, and who voted in federal races.
This split matters for trust. People across the political spectrum worry that leaders protect their own power instead of guarding the vote. Targeted cases built on sworn forms, agency records, and specific ballots are testable in court. Bulk lists built from database matches before an election can sweep in citizens and feed claims of intimidation. The court shifted the focus to the narrow path: prove each case with documents and dates, not with estimates.
What To Watch Next
Watch for release of the defendant complaints and any exhibits that show each person’s registration form, the citizenship claim, naturalization status, and voting history. That evidence will show how strong the 28 cases are. Also watch how the government handles the 20,000-name list under court scrutiny. If reviewers find many naturalized citizens on it, pressure will grow to abandon broad list tactics and stick to verified, individual violations proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Sources:
redstate.com, news.bloomberglaw.com, democracydocket.com, justice.gov
