DOJ seeks Supreme Court review of California voter roll dispute
Federal officials want the high court to stop California from counting ballots for 20,000 people they identify as likely noncitizens.
By Allison Rojas ·
The Department of Justice filed a request with the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday to intervene in a dispute over California voter rolls.
The federal government argues that 20,000 individuals on the state's voter list are likely noncitizens. DOJ wants the Supreme Court to order California to pause processing ballots for these voters until citizenship is verified.
Lower courts have blocked the federal effort. Judge David Carter, a Clinton appointee, rejected the initial request. A divided panel from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals also denied emergency relief on Friday. The panel included Trump appointee Mark Bennett and Biden appointee Gabriel Sanchez.
The two judges who approved the denial cited the Purcell principle. This legal standard discourages changing election rules on the eve of a vote. They noted that the Constitution grants states authority to manage elections. They also pointed to the National Voter Registration Act, which limits state removal of ineligible voters within 90 days of a federal election.
Patrick Bumatay, the third judge on the panel and a Trump appointee, dissented from the decision. The Ninth Circuit opinion stated there was a material risk that the requested relief would disenfranchise voters and jeopardize the county's entire election.
County election officials argue the federal list is unreliable. They say creating a system to segregate ballots during an active election is infeasible. The actual number of disputed ballots is likely lower than 20,000. Many people on the DOJ list did not have active registrations or receive mailed ballots.
Data scientists at UCLA's Voting Rights Project reviewed the DOJ list over the weekend. They found that 42% of the names do not appear on California's current voter roll. The analysis also identified naturalized citizens on the list. The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether to hear the case or rule before Tuesday's Election Day.
