Judges Push Back on DOJ’s California Voter Investigation

Voters at polling booths in a gymnasium — Photo: Steve Sanchez Photos / Shutterstock

Two federal judges, on the same day, curbed the Justice Department’s push over alleged noncitizen voting in California, signaling the courts’ alarm about threats to lawful voters and local election workers.

Story Highlights

A judge ordered the Justice Department to stop threatening California election officials and to halt demands to segregate or not count ballots.
A separate judge required the Justice Department to share its list of about 20,000 alleged noncitizen registrants with outside reviewers at an immigrant rights group.
The Justice Department also charged 28 foreign nationals in California with election-related crimes; some defendants may not have voted.
County spot checks found many flagged names had never voted or had canceled registrations, raising accuracy questions about the list.

What the Courts Ordered and Why It Matters

U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson issued a temporary restraining order telling federal officials to stop demanding that California workers separate or not count ballots tied to alleged noncitizens, and to stop threatening criminal prosecution of local officials who did not comply. The ruling said these actions likely violated protections against intimidation under the Voting Rights Act. The order responds to union claims that federal pressure risked disenfranchising eligible voters and put frontline staff in the crosshairs.

In Washington, D.C., Chief Judge James “Jeb” Boasberg ordered the Justice Department to give its list of about 20,000 suspected noncitizen California registrants to the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and allied legal teams so they can check the list for errors. The order aims to test the government’s matches before any action that could affect a voter’s ballot. That move suggests the court wants evidence vetted by neutral reviewers, not just agency databases.

What the Justice Department Says It Found

The Justice Department, working with the Department of Homeland Security, sued California and said its review identified more than 20,000 likely noncitizens on the voter rolls. Officials said they cross-referenced voter data with federal records and removed people with proof of citizenship before reaching the final list. The department separately announced charges against 28 foreign nationals for alleged illegal voting, false citizenship claims, or fraudulent registration linked to California elections.

Federal officials said the 28 people appeared on the larger list of likely noncitizen registrants, tying the criminal cases to the broader claims. National Public Radio reported that some of those charged may not have voted and that several registrations dated back more than two decades, underscoring the mix of conduct in the group. These details point to alleged paperwork fraud and some illegal voting, but also to cases where voting did not occur, a key difference when weighing risks to valid ballots.

Why Local Reviews and Past Data Urge Caution

Los Angeles County reviewed a sample of 200 names from the Justice Department’s list and reported that 71.2 percent had never voted and 42.9 percent had canceled registrations, raising concerns about list accuracy and relevance to live ballots. Media reports described the Justice Department’s request to segregate ballots as similar to handling provisional ballots, but Judge Thompson’s order said the demand, plus threats of prosecution, likely crossed legal lines that protect voters and workers.

A California judge just told the DOJ it can't threaten election officials for ignoring noncitizen voting claims. That kind of protection doesn't help folks in Redfield who want clean voter rolls.

— Jack Mercer (@mercer31490) October 31, 2026

Broader studies have found noncitizen voting to be extremely rare, which helps explain why sudden, sweeping lists often include many false matches. That pattern does not dismiss real lawbreaking, but it warns against steps that could block lawful votes at scale. The courts’ message is simple: investigate crimes with care, charge where evidence supports it, but do not chill voters or bully clerks while the facts are sorted out.