Judge Carter's Order Says Only 7,035 of DOJ's 20,000 Flagged California Voters Had L.A. County Addresses; DOJ Appeals

A federal judge in California on Wednesday denied the Justice Department's request to set aside the vote-by-mail ballots of more than 20,000 people the federal government identified as likely noncitizens, and the department filed a notice of appeal the same day, according to court records reviewed by The Digital Free Press.

U.S. District Judge David O. Carter's 26-page order in United States v. State of California, No. 2:26-cv-12025, denies the government's application for a temporary restraining order against California, Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder Dean Logan. "In this case, the federal government seeks to segregate and exclude over 20,000 ballots," Carter wrote. "This request violates longstanding constitutional principles mandating that states have control over their elections."

What Judge Carter's Order Says About the List

According to the order, the Justice Department hand-delivered a letter and a password-protected thumb drive to Logan on Oct. 13, after the county had mailed about 5.9 million vote-by-mail ballots. The drive held personal information on more than 20,000 people the government described as "likely noncitizens who were sent a vote-by-mail ballot." The county was told to review the list within 48 hours, set aside ballots from anyone it could not confirm as a citizen and hold off on counting them.

The order describes how the list was built, based on declarations filed by the government. Homeland Security Investigations sent voter profiles to a unit of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which matched them against immigration records using third-party data analytics, screened out citizens using State Department and Social Security data, assigned confidence scores and reviewed each match by hand.

The county's own review, as summarized in the order, found that 7,035 of the more than 20,000 records had Los Angeles County addresses. In a sample of 200 records, 42.4% were active registrations, 42.9% were cancelled and 4.6% were inactive. The order says 71.2% of the list had never voted in a past election.

Why the Court Said No

Carter found the government was unlikely to win on its argument that California is obstructing enforcement of 18 U.S.C. 611, the federal law barring noncitizens from voting in federal elections. He wrote that the department is actively enforcing that law, noting it charged 28 people on the same day it filed its request. He also wrote that the request would likely run afoul of the Tenth Amendment and federal election law, and that the Purcell principle, which discourages courts from changing election rules close to an election, applies "with even greater force" because voting is underway.

The judge wrote that the government "has admitted that it would be unable to complete the citizenship verification prior to election day," and concluded that "a ballot segregated, in effect, would be a ballot removed." The order also cites a Nevada case in which, it says, the state found that all 185 people in a subset the Department of Homeland Security called confirmed noncitizens were U.S. citizens.

The government has said it seeks only a "temporary segregation" of ballots so citizenship can be checked, according to the order.

The Justice Department Appeals

The same day, the Justice Department filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and a renewed request for an injunction while the appeal proceeds. The filing, signed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Julie A. Hamill, says that, by Logan's own admission, once a vote-by-mail ballot "has been processed, it cannot be undone if it is later determined that the voter was ineligible." It asks for a ruling "as soon as possible."

The Ninth Circuit ruled Oct. 26 that it did not have jurisdiction over an earlier appeal the department filed before Carter ruled, according to the order. Election Day is Nov. 3.

Cover photo: Ronald Reagan Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, Santa Ana, Calif. Carol M. Highsmith, Library of Congress, public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

Sources: Order Denying Temporary Restraining Order, United States v. State of California, No. 2:26-cv-12025 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 28, 2026): https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.1043513/gov.uscourts.cacd.1043513.149.0_1.pdf ; United States' renewed request for injunction pending appeal (Oct. 28, 2026): https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.1043513/gov.uscourts.cacd.1043513.153.0.pdf ; Notice of appeal (Oct. 28, 2026): https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.1043513/gov.uscourts.cacd.1043513.152.0.pdf ; Court docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/74967108/united-states-v-state-of-california/