Trump targets California ballots

On the eve of the 2026 midterm election, President Donald Trump's Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to order California to segregate as many as 20,000 ballots.

The list of alleged noncitizens

Trump's administration sent California a list of over 20,000 names on October 13, claiming these individuals are likely noncitizens but nonetheless registered to vote in the state.

Los Angeles County's sample review

Los Angeles County officials reviewed 200 names from the list. Nearly 40 percent were born in the United States, and 56 percent either cancelled registration or are no longer active.

Over 70 percent never voted

In Los Angeles County's preliminary review, over 70 percent of the individuals on Trump's list have never voted in California, suggesting many are not registered voters at all.

Nevada's similar list collapsed

Earlier this year, Trump's administration claimed 16,000 noncitizens appeared on Nevada's voter rolls. When flagged for officials, only 185 names appeared. Nevada determined all 185 are citizens.

The ballots are a tiny fraction

Even if all 20,000 individuals cast votes in the midterms, they would be a tiny fraction of California's electorate. Just shy of 11 million people voted in California's 2022 midterm elections.

Trump's lawyers seek segregation only

Trump's lawyers are not yet asking the Supreme Court to disenfranchise these voters. They merely seek a court order requiring California to set these ballots aside to verify citizenship.

No legal basis for the claim

Trump's lawyers rely on a statute making it a federal misdemeanor for noncitizens to vote. The statute does not regulate states or require ballot segregation. It only empowers federal prosecution of individuals.

Federal law forbids the removal

A separate federal law requires states to remove ineligible voters at least 90 days before a federal election. California cannot comply with Trump's request because it came within 90 days of the election.

Supreme Court precedent against it

Less than two weeks before this case, the Supreme Court said in Scanlan v. Coalition for Open Democracy that federal courts should ordinarily not alter election rules on the eve of an election.

“federal courts "should ordinarily not alter the election rules on the eve of an election."”

Segregation would be logistically impossible

Judge Mark Bennett, a Trump appointee, wrote that California could not comply with segregation even if ordered to. The list lacks identifying information, and creating a new system risks shutting down the entire election.

Unlikely to change 2026 results

Even if the Supreme Court rules for Trump, it is unlikely the decision would change any 2026 race. But it could enable Trump to harass state officials with fabricated lists before the 2028 election.

A weak case at a weak moment

Trump filed this case on the eve of an election when even this Supreme Court is unlikely to rule in his favour.