Judge Rejects DOJ Bid to Separate 20,000 California Ballots
Permanent article number: 102826039 Find another article by number
Original article being examined
Published by: The Gateway Pundit
Original reporting and source documents
Open the reporting and original documents used for this article. These include evidence sources; not every link is necessarily the original claim being examined.
Evidence and accountability
Archive transparency: this article has not yet completed the site's newer independent fact-audit process. Its source links are provided below. Do not treat allegations, commentary, or a rating as a legal finding.
Questions sent by Radical Reading Room
These requests have a recorded outbound message ID and send time. A request for comment does not establish that its recipient read the message.
United States Department of Justice — Public professional press contact
Question: What methodology and criteria did the Justice Department use to identify and flag the approximately 20,000 California voter registrations as suspected or likely noncitizens?
Contacted: October 29, 2026 at 2:03 AM (server time).
Status: Response pending; no substantive response recorded.
A federal judge in California on Wednesday denied the Justice Department’s request for an emergency order requiring election officials to set aside roughly 20,000 ballots tied to registered voters the administration identified as suspected or likely noncitizens. The ruling rejected the requested intervention; it did not establish that those voters were ineligible.
The department sought to hold the flagged ballots apart while voters’ citizenship was verified. The reports describe the ballots as associated with registrations flagged by the government, not as ballots a court found unlawful. The requested order was a temporary restraining order, an emergency measure sought ahead of the election.
Judge David Carter said the request risked disrupting election procedures and potentially discounting votes cast by eligible citizens. In his written decision, he also cited the prospect of a chilling effect on election workers and voters. The reports characterize the citizenship concerns as claims or allegations, rather than verified determinations; Carter pointed to uncertainty and errors in the procedure used to identify the registrations.
Carter’s denial means the department did not obtain the emergency order requiring segregation of the ballots. He wrote that voters who meet California’s registration requirements should not be deprived of voting rights on the basis of unproven allegations. The decision addressed the request to separate the ballots, not the citizenship status of each voter. The underlying claims therefore remain unresolved by this ruling.
Comments
Read the discussion freely. Posting and voting require a verified member account. Every comment and reply is screened by AI before publication. Clear spam and abuse are blocked; only strongly cleared comments publish automatically, while uncertain drafts wait for moderator review. Civil factual disagreement alone is not grounds for rejection.
Log in to comment or join free to take part.
No comments yet. Be the first reasonably on-topic person here.