LOS ANGELES — A federal judge has rejected the Trump administration's attempt to force California to set aside 20,000 ballots from people the government describes as "likely noncitizens," warning that the move would "wreak havoc" on the election. The ruling by U.S. District Judge David Carter, announced days before Election Day, is a significant setback for the administration's push to challenge ballots in Democratic-leaning states.

It also came just two days after the administration made a similar demand of Washington state, which was asked to set aside hundreds of ballots, setting up what could be a series of courtroom clashes over who gets to decide which votes count.

What the Administration Wanted

The administration asked California to set aside roughly 20,000 ballots cast by voters it labels likely noncitizens. The designation, as described in reporting on the case, rests on the government's assessment rather than a court finding that any individual voter is ineligible. Under federal law, noncitizens are barred from voting in federal elections, and prosecutions for doing so are rare but real. The dispute is not over whether noncitizen voting is illegal, but over whether the government can compel a state to quarantine thousands of ballots on the strength of a list generated days before the election.

Carter's decision to reject that request, and his stark language about the potential for chaos, signals deep skepticism about the practical and legal basis for the demand.

Why the Judge Said It Would "Wreak Havoc"

Election administrators typically work from tightly sequenced procedures: ballots are received, signatures are verified, and counting proceeds under rules set well in advance. Pulling tens of thousands of ballots out of that pipeline at the last minute would force officials to improvise, could delay results and might disenfranchise eligible citizens who were swept up by flawed matching. Lists built by matching voter files against other databases are known to produce false positives, including naturalized citizens whose status changed after the records were created.

That is the heart of the risk Carter appears to have weighed. A mistake in a list of 20,000 names affects real voters, and once a ballot is separated from the count, restoring it can be difficult and slow.

The Washington State Request

Two days before the California ruling, the administration made a similar request to Washington state, seeking to set aside hundreds of ballots. The numbers are smaller, but the principle is the same. Washington, like California, conducts its elections largely by mail, which means ballots arrive over a period of days and weeks and are verified in stages. Whether Washington complies, resists or ends up in court is one of the questions to watch.

Taken together, the two requests suggest a broader strategy of pressing states to treat government-identified ballots differently before the count is complete. Critics argue this inverts the normal burden: instead of challenging a specific ballot with evidence, the government asks for a category to be set aside and then sorts out the details.

Connections to the Wider Election Fight

The ruling is one front in a larger struggle. On the same news cycle, President Trump demanded that the Justice Department block certification of an Alaska Senate race if his preferred candidate loses, and the Supreme Court has previously allowed the administration to use an expanded database in connection with efforts to review voter rolls. Together these developments form a pattern: the executive branch is pushing, in multiple places, for a more active federal role in policing election outcomes, traditionally the province of states and counties.

Supporters of the administration say the effort is about election security and ensuring only citizens vote. Opponents say it is aimed at creating doubt and delay, and that the proper remedy for noncitizen voting is individualized investigation and prosecution, not mass quarantine of ballots.

What It Means for Voters

For California voters, the immediate takeaway is reassurance: the ruling means that ballots flagged by the administration will not be separated from the count on the strength of its request alone. Voters who have mailed or dropped off ballots do not need to take any additional steps. Those who have not yet voted can still do so, and election officials continue to count ballots according to state law.

The administration could appeal, and the ruling applies only to the specific demand made to California. Other states may face similar requests, and the legal reasoning Carter used could be tested in other courts.

What to Watch Next

Watch for whether the Justice Department appeals, how Washington state responds to its own request, and whether further states receive similar demands in the final days before the election. Also watch for any federal move after Election Day, when certification disputes could surface. USA Herald will continue to follow the legal fight over the ballots.