Federal Judge Rejects DOJ Bid to Set Aside 20,000 California Mail Ballots
The ruling places the administration's ballot-challenge strategy in direct conflict with a federal court six days before the 2026 midterm elections, with an appeal already filed.
A federal judge on October 29, 2026, denied a Justice Department request to compel California to segregate as many as 20,000 mail-in ballots from voters the administration claims are likely non-citizens, saying the move would "wreak havoc" on midterm elections already underway, according to Bloomberg News.
The Justice Department filed an appeal of the ruling the same day, according to the same report. The appeal shifts the matter to a higher court with Election Day set for November 4, 2026, meaning the appellate court would need to act within days to have any effect on ballot processing.
The DOJ's underlying legal argument centers on the claim that the 20,000 voters in question are likely non-citizens and therefore ineligible to cast ballots under federal law. It is unknown, based on publicly available filings reviewed for this report, what specific database or federal records the department used to identify those voters. The methodology behind that identification would be contained in the original federal complaint and any attached exhibits, which are public court records.
California election officials have not, as of publication, confirmed the precise number of contested ballots or the counties in which they are concentrated. A full accounting would appear in any court-ordered disclosure or in the state's official canvass records after the election.
The phrase "wreak havoc," quoted directly by Bloomberg from the judge's order, reflects the court's assessment of operational disruption rather than a ruling on the underlying eligibility question. The judge did not, according to available reporting, issue a final determination on whether any of the 20,000 voters are in fact non-citizens.
Federal courts have jurisdiction over election disputes involving alleged violations of the National Voter Registration Act and related federal statutes. Challenges to voter eligibility in the days immediately preceding an election have historically faced a high legal bar under the Purcell principle, a doctrine under which federal courts are reluctant to change election rules close to an election date. The Supreme Court has applied that principle in multiple cases, including Purcell v. Gonzalez (2006), to deny last-minute injunctions affecting voting procedures.
The 2026 midterm election cycle has already produced multiple active court disputes. The Congressional Times reported on October 28 that federal and state courts are handling at least two election disputes before the November 4 midterms, a count that the California ballot case now supplements.
Mail-in voting rules vary by state. California expanded automatic mail ballot distribution to all registered voters under Assembly Bill 37, signed into law in 2021. The state processed approximately 22.1 million ballots in the 2022 general election, according to the California Secretary of State's official election returns, with the majority arriving by mail.
The Justice Department has not, as of publication, issued a public statement specifying which federal statute authorizes the requested relief or which official authorized the filing. Those details would appear in the original complaint and in any accompanying declaration from a senior DOJ official, both of which are public court records accessible through the federal PACER system.
What remains unknown: whether the appellate court will act before November 4; the precise list of counties or precincts where the contested ballots originated; and the specific data source DOJ used to flag the 20,000 voters. The original complaint, the government's appellate brief, and California's response brief, once filed, would answer all three questions.