Ninth Circuit questions Trump bid to set aside California ballots
- A three-judge panel from a federal appeals court reviewed the Trump administration's urgent push to compel California to set aside numerous mail-in ballots connected to individuals whom the...
- Roughly 20,000 mail-in ballots sent to individuals suspected of being noncitizens were the subject of an emergency filing submitted by the Justice Department.
- Examining whether the administration's sought-after injunction aligns with the Constitution's Elections Clause—which grants state legislatures power over the timing, locations, and procedures of congressional elections, subject to congressional...
A three-judge panel from a federal appeals court reviewed the Trump administration’s urgent push to compel California to set aside numerous mail-in ballots connected to individuals whom the Justice Department believes might be noncitizens prior to the midterm elections. During a nearly two-hour hearing, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit questioned both the government’s legal arguments and whether the court has jurisdiction to intervene at this stage, Fox News reported.
Roughly 20,000 mail-in ballots sent to individuals suspected of being noncitizens were the subject of an emergency filing submitted by the Justice Department. Warning that hundreds of thousands of California ballots could be processed daily while the matter remains unsettled, the federal government urged the panel to deliver an immediate decision.
Arguments on the Elections Clause and Jurisdiction
Examining whether the administration’s sought-after injunction aligns with the Constitution’s Elections Clause—which grants state legislatures power over the timing, locations, and procedures of congressional elections, subject to congressional oversight—was Circuit Judge Mark Bennett, a Trump appointee. He asked Justice Department attorney Matthew Donnelly how the court could issue an injunction that appears entirely inconsistent with the law the California legislature adopted pursuant to the Elections Clause.
🚨 BREAKING: Ninth Circuit Judges Just TORCHED the DOJ’s Last-Ditch Bid to Stop 20,000 “Likely Non-Citizen” California Ballots From Being Counted! 🚨The Trump DOJ rushed an emergency appeal to the 9th Circuit demanding California set aside roughly 20,000 mail-in ballots tied to… pic.twitter.com/8WOQN4mkrm
Raising questions about why the Ninth Circuit should intervene when the district court has not yet ruled on the DOJ’s motion and a hearing before U.S. District Judge David Carter is still scheduled for Tuesday was Judge Gabriel Sanchez, a Biden appointee. Meanwhile, Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee, focused on the government’s concerns regarding potential noncitizen voting and questioned California’s handling of challenges involving suspected ineligible voters.
Disputed Data and Safeguards in California
The Justice Department initially filed the suit Oct. 15, roughly two weeks after California began mailing ballots. Before oral arguments, the Trump administration accused California of having a history of “mishandling voter rolls.”
Stressing that it maintains strong protections to prevent noncitizen voting, California has contested the data provided by the federal government. In a filing this weekend, California argued that the federal government’s theory would “turn the Constitution on its head.” Pointing out apparent flaws—such as individuals born in the United States or people not registered to vote—Los Angeles County officials noted that an initial examination of part of the federal government’s list uncovered discrepancies.
Ballots Cast and Pending Court Action
Litigation figures indicate that upwards of 3 million votes have already been cast across the state, with Los Angeles County accounting for more than 500,000 of them. Stressing the urgency of its petition, the Justice Department warned that failing to issue a ruling immediately runs the risk of allowing more ballots to be processed prior to the resolution of the citizenship controversy.
Bennett said the three-judge panel would try to issue a ruling as quickly as possible.