Federal Prosecutors Charge 63 Noncitizens in Election Eve Crackdown

Key points

• The DOJ announced charges against 63 people for illegal voting and fraudulent registration, including four illegal aliens and numerous lawful permanent residents.
• In California, 12 individuals were charged; Meryll Quirong Costi, a 36-year-old nursing worker, appeared in federal court in Sacramento on November 2.
• Costi’s attorney, Kyle Knapp, stated she was 'mortified' and questioned the timing of the prosecution, noting she surrendered herself voluntarily.
• The DOJ claims these arrests support a lawsuit to force California to set aside 20,000 ballots, which the Supreme Court rejected on November 2.
• Attorney General Todd Blanche called this the largest surge of voter-fraud arrests since President Trump returned to office.
• The charges include false claims of citizenship and voting in federal elections, with penalties up to one year in prison for misdemeanors.

Background

This escalation follows a series of federal actions in 2026, including charges against 28 California residents in October and 10 in Minnesota in September. Courts have repeatedly blocked the DOJ’s attempts to sequester ballots, citing data reliability issues, with a UCLA analysis finding a 42% error rate in the DOJ’s noncitizen voter list. The current actions occur amid a broader legal battle over the constitutionality of federal intervention in state election processes.

How outlets are covering it

The DOJ, led by Attorney General Todd Blanche, frames the charges as necessary to restore confidence in electoral integrity and combat widespread fraud. In contrast, The Sacramento Bee and The Guardian highlight the political timing, with California Governor Gavin Newsom accusing the administration of sowing doubt about election results. The Guardian notes that experts consider noncitizen voting rare and often the result of administrative errors, such as California’s automatic voter registration system. The DOJ defends its use of 'third-party databases' despite acknowledging potential inaccuracies, while critics point to the Supreme Court’s rejection of the ballot sequestration request as evidence of overreach.

Why it matters

The timing of these prosecutions, occurring 24 hours before a pivotal midterm election, raises significant questions about federal influence on state election processes. The legal challenges to the DOJ’s data reliability and the Supreme Court’s rejection of the ballot sequestration request highlight ongoing tensions between federal enforcement and state election integrity. These actions could impact public trust in the electoral system and set precedents for future federal-state conflicts over voting rights.

What to watch

Meryll Quirong Costi’s next court hearing is scheduled for November 30, 2026. The DOJ is expected to continue pursuing its lawsuit to force California to sequester ballots, despite recent court rejections. The outcome of the midterm elections will likely influence the political landscape and the administration’s ability to continue its voter fraud initiatives. Legal challenges regarding the constitutionality of the DOJ’s actions and the reliability of its data are expected to continue in federal courts.