DOJ Sues California After State Refuses to Review List of Likely Noncitizen Voters Sent Live Ballots
REDDING — With mail ballots already in the hands of California voters and less than three weeks until the November 3 midterm election, the U.S. Department of Justice has filed a federal lawsuit against the state after officials declined to review a list of more than 20,000 people the federal government believes are likely noncitizens who were automatically mailed ballots.
Acting Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter sent a letter dated October 13 to Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber demanding action within 48 hours. The letter cited federal law, 18 U.S.C. § 611, which makes it a crime for noncitizens to vote in federal elections, and noted that California’s universal vote-by-mail system automatically sends ballots to every registered voter.
According to the letter, the DOJ had that day provided the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk with a password-protected thumb drive containing the names. McCotter asked the state to review the list, segregate—not cancel—any returned ballots from individuals whose citizenship could not be independently confirmed, and withhold unsent ballots until status was verified. The deadline was noon Eastern on October 15. Failure to act, the letter warned, would leave the United States “no choice but to seek emergency relief.”
Weber responded on October 15, rejecting the demands. She noted that a July letter from DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin had alleged over 190,000 potential noncitizens on the rolls but provided no data or methodology despite repeated requests. She described the current list of roughly 20,000 as lacking sufficient detail for investigative use and argued that the requested steps threatened to disenfranchise registered voters based on unverified federal claims. Weber also pointed to the National Voter Registration Act’s 90-day quiet period against systematic list maintenance before a federal election and California law requiring ballots to be mailed to registered voters and tabulated once returned.
The DOJ filed suit the same day in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (United States v. State of California et al., No. 2:26-cv-12025). The complaint alleges that federal agencies, including USCIS and Homeland Security Investigations, identified the individuals through cross-checks of voter rolls against immigration records, SAVE data, and other identifiers, classifying high-confidence matches. It seeks a court order blocking the state from tabulating vote-by-mail ballots from those on the list until citizenship can be verified, arguing that California’s automatic mailing and signature-verification practices facilitate violations of federal law.
First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli for the Central District of California posted on X: “Time is up for California. We gave California 48 hours to review and flag more than 20,000 noncitizen voters recently mailed live ballots. California refused. This morning we filed a federal court action seeking an emergency order requiring California to sequester ballots returned by suspected noncitizens. This is not political or controversial. 18 U.S.C. § 611 makes it a federal offense for noncitizens to vote in a federal election. We will not allow California to dilute the votes of American citizens."
For North State residents who have spent years pushing for stronger safeguards, the dispute lands close to home. Shasta County voters approved Measure B in June, which would have required photo ID, limited most voting to a single Election Day with restricted absentee options, mandated precinct-level hand counting, and established offline local voter rolls. The measure is currently blocked by a state lawsuit and preliminary injunction, with the November election proceeding under existing rules. Local coverage has repeatedly documented concerns about chain of custody, records retention, and the practical limits of signature verification under universal mail voting.
The core federal claim is straightforward: noncitizens are prohibited by statute from voting in federal races, and every ballot cast by an ineligible person dilutes the vote of a citizen. California maintains that its registration process—requiring an attestation of citizenship under penalty of perjury—and list-maintenance procedures meet federal standards, and that late-stage interventions risk erroneous disenfranchisement. Critics of the state’s position note that registration is largely an honor system and that the automatic mailing of ballots creates an opportunity for ballots to reach people who should never have been on the rolls.
Whether the federal court grants the requested sequestration order remains to be seen. Election-law observers have flagged the late timing and the NVRA quiet-period rules as significant obstacles. What is clear is that the question of who is eligible to cast a federal ballot—and how states verify that eligibility when ballots are already in circulation—is now in active litigation three weeks before Election Day.
North State voters watching the case will recognize the tension: local majorities have voted for tighter controls, while Sacramento has resisted those changes in court. The DOJ action is the latest federal attempt to enforce the citizenship requirement that both federal statute and every state law already treat as fundamental.
