Judge Carter rejects DOJ bid to halt California ballot counting, citing state sovereignty

Key points

• Judge David Carter ruled that the Justice Department's demand to sequester ballots based on unverified citizenship claims would 'wreak havoc' and violate state sovereignty.
• The DOJ provided a list of 20,000 names via USB drive with only 48 hours for review, refusing to disclose its methodology or data sources.
• Carter noted that the federal government has existing prosecutorial tools to address illegal voting and should not disrupt state election processes.
• The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals previously rejected the DOJ's attempt to expedite the case, ruling the administration's urgency was 'self-constructed.'
• California officials found preliminary errors in the DOJ's list, including names not on voter rolls or in suspended status.

Background

This dispute follows a July 2026 announcement by the Department of Homeland Security claiming up to 190,000 non-citizens were on California voter rolls. The administration has faced legal challenges in other states, including Washington, regarding similar data-matching efforts. Previous archive coverage highlighted the 9th Circuit's skepticism of the DOJ's emergency tactics and its assertion that states retain primary authority over election procedures under the Elections Clause.

How outlets are covering it

The Guardian and CNN emphasize the ruling as a defense of state sovereignty and a rejection of 'legally thin' federal interference, highlighting Carter's warning that the move would disenfranchise citizens. ABC News focuses on the procedural setback, noting Carter's intent to appoint a special master to investigate the DOJ's data compilation process. NBC News highlights the legal arguments, noting Carter's insistence that the DOJ use its prosecutorial powers rather than disrupting ballot counting, while also noting the dissenting view from a Trump-appointed judge that federal law precludes counting potentially illegal votes. All sources agree that the DOJ's methodology is opaque and that local officials found significant inaccuracies in the provided lists.

Why it matters

The ruling sets a precedent for the limits of federal executive power over state election administration, particularly during the 'quiet period' before elections. It reinforces the principle that states control their own election procedures and that federal interference must not disrupt the counting process. The decision allows California to proceed with counting mail-in ballots for the November 3 midterms, potentially impacting the outcome of close races in the state.

What to watch

The Justice Department has indicated it will appeal Carter's ruling. The administration may continue to provide lists of suspected non-citizen voters to other states, though the legal basis for such actions is now weakened. California election officials will proceed with counting ballots as scheduled, while the DOJ may pursue federal prosecutions of individuals it believes voted illegally.