A federal judge has raised doubts about a Justice Department effort to separate about 20,000 ballots in California. The case comes just days before the state’s election. The government claims the ballots may be linked to people who are likely not U.S. citizens.
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter heard arguments on Tuesday. He questioned the need for urgent action so close to election day. He also said he plans to appoint a special master to examine how the Justice Department built its list of alleged noncitizens.
The judge did not issue a final ruling during the hearing. However, his remarks dealt a setback to the Trump administration’s effort to change how California handles the ballots. Carter called the proposed change a major step and appeared doubtful about making such a change late in the election process.
He told both sides that he planned to issue an order on the next steps by Wednesday. Until then, the court has not ordered California to separate the ballots.
The Justice Department brought the case to challenge California’s handling of voter records. It wants state officials to set aside around 20,000 ballots linked to people it considers likely noncitizens. The department says federal law bars noncitizens from voting in federal elections.
Bill Essayli, a Trump-appointed leader in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, defended the government’s request. He said the administration was seeking to ensure that California follows federal law.
The government argues that it has a duty to protect the voting process. It says the names on its list need careful review to ensure that ballots are handled in line with the law. Yet Carter’s questions suggest that the court wants more details about the list and the steps used to create it.
California officials and lawyers opposing the case warned that the plan could disrupt election work. They argued that states have a long-standing role in running their own elections. They also said the lawsuit raises concerns about the balance of power between state and federal authorities.
The timing is a major issue. Election workers are already processing ballots and preparing to count votes. An order to separate thousands of ballots at this stage could add new tasks and make the process more complex.
Opponents also warned that the plan could cause delays as officials work toward final vote totals. Changes to ballot handling could lead to confusion and more legal disputes. They said local election teams need clear rules as they carry out their duties.
Carter’s plan to appoint a special master could shape the next stage of the case. The official would examine the process the Justice Department used to create its list of roughly 20,000 people. The review may help the judge assess the strength of the government’s claims and decide whether emergency action is justified.
The court has not found that all the people on the list are noncitizens. That claim remains part of the government’s case. A review of the list could help explain how the names were selected and what evidence supports the department’s position.
Carter also raised concerns about letters the administration sent to election officials across California. The letters suggested that officials could face prosecution if they took part in counting ballots that might be linked to people on the list.
The judge gave a firm warning about those messages. He said the court believed that any threats against elected state and county employees should stop at once. His remarks showed concern about the pressure such warnings could place on officials during an active election.
Election workers must follow the law as they check records and count votes. The threat of prosecution could make their work harder at a time when the process is under close public watch. Carter’s comments added a new point of tension between the court and the administration.
The case is part of a wider debate over federal authority and state control of elections. The Justice Department says it is acting to enforce voting laws. California and other opponents argue that the lawsuit could interfere with state duties and disrupt the vote count.
The next court order will help decide how the case moves forward. Carter may set rules for the planned review and consider whether the department can obtain emergency relief before the election. For now, California has not been ordered to separate the ballots, and the legal dispute remains unresolved.
