Deep Receipts

Supreme Court rejects Trump's request to stop California counting disputed votes

6 outlets · 7 articles covering this story, sorted by lean.

4 left1 center2 right

Left · 4

US Supreme Court rejects Trump DOJ’s attempt to freeze California vote countingcoloradonewsline.com · cred 7/10
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, mere hours before Election Day in the midterms that will determine control of Congress, denied the Trump administration’s final attempt to force California to set aside the ballots of 20,000 people it suspects are noncitizens. The decision marked a significant blow to President Donald Trump’s bid to control voting in […]
- · U.S. Supreme Court denied Trump DOJ’s attempt to freeze California vote counting on April 9, 2026.
- · Justice Department demanded California set aside ballots of 20,000 people suspected of being noncitizens.
'A Complete DEFEAT for Trump DOJ': Supreme Court Rejects Push to Set Aside 20K California Ballotscommondreams.org · cred 7/10
<img src="https://www.commondreams.org/media-library/early-voting-ahead-of-november-3-general-election.jpg?id=68579929&width=1200&height=400&coordinates=0%2C212%2C0%2C1455" /> Although the US Supreme Court has a right-wing supermajority with multiple appointees of President Donald Trump, the nation's top tribunal rejected his administration's effort to set aside thousands of California ballots on the eve of the midterm elections.The one-sentence <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28863455-26a624-order/" target="_blank">order</a> simply says that the application for an injunction pending appeal, presented to Justice Elena Kagan—one of the three liberals—and referred by her to the full court, is denied, with no noted dissents. Trump has long claimed that voter fraud by immigrants is a rampant issue in the United States—despite evidence to the contrary—and his Department of Justice <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-doj-california-ballots" target="_blank">sued</a> California last week after the state refused to set aside ballots from a list of voters the DOJ claimed could be noncitizens and thus ineligible to vote, based on databases known to be full of <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/supreme-court-trump-voter-database" target="_self">errors</a>.<blockquote class="rm-embed twitter-tweet"> <a href="https://twitter.com/NormEisen/status/2117393096392528200"></a> </blockquote> Democratic election attorney Marc Elias was among those <a href="https://x.com/marceelias/status/2117389385327096058" target="_blank">celebrating</a> the justices' denial of an emergency stay. He noted that "the court did not even ask for opposition briefs!" The lawyer called it "a complete DEFEAT for Trump DOJ," and "another victory for Elias Law Group and our clients."Joyce White Vance, a University of Alabama law professor and legal commentator on networks including MS NOW, similarly <a href="https://x.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/2117391456084349074" target="_blank">declared</a> that "the Supreme Court declines to let Trump interfere in the election in California."US House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY)—who could lead the chamber if Democrats win a majority on Tuesday—also <a href="https://x.com/RepJeffries/status/2117392591524360439" target="_blank">applauded</a> that "the Supreme Court just denied the Trump Justice Department's corrupt request for an injunction in the California vote count," calling it "another complete and total defeat for the extremists."As The Associated Press <a href="https://apnews.com/article/midterm-elections-immigration-voter-fraud-trump-48998968a23a4af2f59eaea3dba4d2f3?user_email=b8b0cd3b7b7c8c1ffb7c6de9857e5c725d8178193348c7edf773382efbcd1f7d" target="_blank">reported</a> Monday: <blockquote>A district court judge previously denied the Justice Department’s request and warned that the demand could disenfranchise citizens in Tuesday’s midterm elections to determine control of Congress. Also on Monday in Washington, another federal judge ruled against the administration's efforts to make last-minute demands of California election officials, finding they violated the US Constitution. </blockquote>California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Monday also pointed to recent rulings against the administration in a social media exchange with Bill Essayli, first assistant US attorney for the Central District of California.<blockquote class="rm-embed twitter-tweet"> <a href="https://twitter.com/AGRobBonta/status/2117380953975005254"></a> </blockquote> While the Supreme Court has sometimes <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/feeds/Bill%20Essayli,%20First%20Assistant%20U.S.%20Attorney%20for%20the%20Central%20District%20of%20California." target="_blank">sided</a> with Trump's agenda during his second term, it has rejected some of his recent attacks on democracy, including a September <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/major-win-for-democracy-as-supreme-court-rejects-trump-attack-on-mail-in-voting" target="_blank">decision</a> against his US Postal Service rules for mail-in ballots.Despite the win at the high court on Monday, the president's efforts to interfere with the midterms are expected to continue. Given that, the Advancement Project, Legal Defense Fund, and NAACP are <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/groups-seek-to-block-doj-voter-intimidation" target="_blank">seeking</a> an order to block federal law enforcement agents from serving as "election monitors."The midterms come as Trump's public approval is at an <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-approval-record-low" target="_blank">all-time low</a>, and Democrats highlight his illegal war on Iran and the related cost-of-living crisis in their efforts to secure majorities in the Senate and House of Representatives for the rest of his second term.
- · The US Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration's effort to set aside thousands of California ballots.
- · The application for an injunction pending appeal was denied without noted dissents.
Another judge blocks DOJ ballot demands in Californiaaxios.com · cred 5/10
A federal judge on the eve of <a href="https://www.axios.com/politics-policy/election-results-voting" target="_blank">Election</a> Day barred the <a href="https://www.axios.com/politics-policy/donald-trump" target="_blank">Trump</a> administration from demanding California officials set aside ballots from registered voters it suspects are noncitizens, finding the effort likely violates the Constitution.Why it matters: Courts had <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/30/doj-california-noncitizen-voter-list-court" target="_blank">already rejected</a> the Justice Department's attempts to force California to separate the ballots. <ul><li>Monday's ruling goes a step further, directly barring federal officials from making those demands even as DOJ <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/11/02/trump-supreme-court-california-ballots-case" target="_blank">turns to the Supreme Court</a> to compel the state to comply.</li></ul><hr />Driving the news: Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg <a href="https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/74737644/47/trujillo-v-us-department-of-homeland-security/" target="_blank">ruled</a> Monday that the Trump administration likely violated the Constitution by pressuring California officials to change how they count ballots.<ul><li>His order prohibits the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security from demanding officials set aside ballots or depart from existing state election procedures based on federal lists of suspected noncitizens.</li><li>Boasberg found that the Constitution gives states and Congress, but not the executive branch, authority over election rules. The federal ban on noncitizen voting does not mean the administration can rewrite those rules.</li></ul>By the numbers: The DOJ claims it identified more than 20,000 suspected noncitizens on California's voter rolls.<ul><li>After Boasberg ordered DOJ to turn over its list, an expert found that at least 22 members of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights — all known U.S. citizens — were wrongly included. The expert found another 66 members were almost certainly on the list.</li><li>Boasberg found the expert credible and concluded the list's errors posed a real threat to eligible voters.</li></ul>What he's saying: "The President evidently believes that it would be good public policy for more stringent procedures to be put in place," Boasberg wrote. "No matter how strong that policy case may be, however, it does not justify overstepping the bounds of the Executive Branch's limited constitutional authority in this domain."<ul><li>The White House referred Axios to the Department of Homeland Security for comment. DHS and the Justice Department did not immediately respond to Axios' requests for comment.</li></ul>Catch up quick: In a <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/30/doj-california-noncitizen-voter-list-court" target="_blank">separate lawsuit</a>, DOJ sought to force California and Los Angeles County to segregate ballots from suspected noncitizens. A federal judge rejected that request Wednesday, as did an appeals court on Friday.<ul><li>Monday's ruling is different in that it restricts the federal government from making its demands rather than simply refusing to order California to comply.</li><li>It also follows a <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/31/doj-threats-election-workers-midterms" target="_blank">broader nationwide temporary restraining order</a> Friday that prohibits similar demands and threats of prosecution against election workers.</li></ul>Yes, but: Boasberg did not prohibit federal officials from investigating illegal voting or compiling lists of suspected noncitizens.<ul><li>Federal law makes it a crime for noncitizens to vote in federal elections, and DOJ can prosecute people who knowingly break that law. But that doesn't give DOJ the authority to order states to change how they verify voter eligibility or count ballots, Boasberg wrote.</li><li>California can continue following its election procedures while federal prosecutors pursue illegal voting, Boasberg said.</li></ul>What's next: The Supreme Court could still order California to set aside the disputed ballots. 
- · A federal judge barred the Trump administration from demanding California officials set aside ballots from suspected noncitizens.
- · Chief U.S. District Judge James Boasberg ruled that the Trump administration likely violated the Constitution by pressuring California to change ballot counting procedures.
SCOTUS rejects Trump's bid over disputed California ballotsaxios.com · cred 5/10
The Supreme Court denied the Trump administration's request Monday to hear its case regarding more than <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/11/02/trump-supreme-court-california-ballots-case" target="_blank">20,000 California ballots</a> that President <a href="https://www.axios.com/politics-policy/donald-trump" target="_blank">Trump</a> claims were cast by <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/15/trump-doj-california-voters-ballots-lawsuit" target="_blank">noncitizens</a>.Why it matters: It's a blow to the administration, which has been tussling with the state in what it says is a fight to ensure all eligible voters can vote and have their ballots counted, as the law requires.<hr />What they're saying: "The application for injunction pending appeal presented to Justice Kagan and by her referred to the Court is denied," an unsigned order from the court <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/110226zr_3eb4.pdf" target="_blank">read</a>.Catch up quick: The Trump administration sued California in mid-October, arguing that it had identified more than 20,000 noncitizens on the state's voter rolls.<ul><li>Judges have consistently rejected the administration's argument, finding that its lists contain factual errors and risk disenfranchising eligible voters.</li><li>One judge even noted that when the administration claimed it had specifically verified more than 100 people as noncitizens in Nevada, the state proved they were, in fact, citizens.</li></ul>Zoom out: The court has often sided with Trump, but has notably <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/09/14/supreme-court-trump-mail-in-voting-rule" target="_blank">broken</a> with him on cases involving voting access.<ul><li>The president has no constitutional authority over elections. That power largely rests with the states and Congress.</li></ul>The White House and the Department of Justice did not respond to Axios' request for comment.Go deeper: <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/11/02/trump-supreme-court-california-ballots-case" target="_blank">Trump administration turns to SCOTUS in California ballot case</a>
- · The Supreme Court denied the Trump administration's request to hear its case regarding more than 20,000 California ballots.
- · The administration claims the ballots were cast by noncitizens.

Center / Wire · 1

Supreme Court rejects Trump's request to stop California counting disputed votesbbc.co.uk · cred 8/10
The ruling, which comes on the eve of the midterm elections, essentially ends the Trump administration's bid to disqualify the ballots in the state.
- · Supreme Court rejected Trump administration's request to stop California counting disputed votes.
- · Justice Department sought to set aside 20,000 ballots alleged to be from non-US citizens.

Right · 2

Supreme Court Rejects DOJ Request For California To Set Aside 20,000 Ballotszerohedge.com · cred 7/10
Supreme Court Rejects DOJ Request For California To Set Aside 20,000 Ballots <div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-hidden field__item">Update (1800ET): Following a divided appeals court's rejection of the DOJ's request, the Supreme Court has now rejected Trump’s push for California to set aside thousands of disputed mail ballots ahead of midterms.The brief, unsigned order from the high court did not give a rationale. There were no noted dissents.<a href="https://cms.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/HWJ7XbOW0AAacOv_83ea0380-45bb-4ecd-ab3d-9a1fb3752c20.jpg"><img alt="Image" height="203" src="https://cms.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/HWJ7XbOW0AAacOv_83ea0380-45bb-4ecd-ab3d-9a1fb3752c20.jpg" width="500" /></a>The court acted only hours after the administration filed the request. The justices opted not to ask California to file a response, as normally happens when they think an issue might be a close call.Also on Monday in Washington, Chief Judge James Boasberg ordered the Trump administration to stop making its demands, finding they violated the U.S. Constitution.“The Executive Branch has likely violated the Constitution’s Elections Clause, which commits authority over election rules to the states and Congress alone,” wrote Boasberg.The Supreme Court has often sided with Trump, but has notably broken with him on cases involving voting access.~~~~~~<a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/appeals-court-rejects-doj-request-for-california-to-set-aside-20000-ballots-6111307?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge">As Jack Phillips reported yesterday via The Epoch Times</a>, a U.S. appeals court has rejected the Trump administration's request to stop California from counting ballots from 20,000 potential noncitizen voters.<a href="https://cms.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/image%20-%202026-10-30T150614.950.jpg"><img alt="alt" height="338" src="https://cms.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/image%20-%202026-10-30T150614.950.jpg" width="500" /></a>In a 39-page ruling, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled 2-1 that it declines the administration's "invitation to contravene the Elections Clause by undermining the Constitution's plain text.""If the United States believes different procedures are necessary for vote-by-mail ballots, we believe it should take that suggestion to Congress, not the courts," the majority stated.A district court judge <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/federal-judge-denies-doj-bid-to-isolate-challenged-california-ballots-ahead-of-midterms-6110024?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge">already denied</a> that request and said that the Department of Justice's (DOJ) demands could disenfranchise citizens.Referring to that ruling, the appeals court wrote, "As the district court found - and we discern no clear error - there is no feasible way to identify and segregate the ballots of specific individuals without potentially catastrophic effects on the entire system."The panel rejected the government's emergency request for an injunction that would have barred the 20,000 ballots from being tallied until the voters' citizenship was verified. The midterm elections are set to be held on Tuesday, Nov. 3.The Trump administration said it believes that the suspected noncitizens have already received mail-in ballots for the midterms and that if California officials receive those ballots, mix them with legitimate ones, and process them, illegal votes will be counted.California officials have described the list as highly unreliable, saying it likely includes many people who are U.S. citizens.State and county officials confirmed they lacked the mechanisms and authority to prevent non-U.S. citizens from voting in the elections, the DOJ wrote in its lawsuit earlier this month, meaning those individuals could potentially illegally vote in the election."As defendants continue processing ballots that cannot later be segregated or verified for eligibility, the dilution of lawful votes accelerates in real time," the DOJ <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/doj-seeks-appeals-court-intervention-in-california-ballot-lawsuit-6107851?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge">said</a> on Oct. 21 in an emergency filing to the appeals court.Los Angeles County filed a motion asking the district judge to dismiss the lawsuit and argued that the DOJ lacked the legal standing to bring it."The executive, like any other plaintiff, must identify a concrete injury, actual or imminent, fairly traceable to the county's conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief. The complaint identifies none," the complaint stated.The Trump administration is enhancing its scrutiny of local elections, and recently issued a raft of subpoenas in Alaska in a spoiler-candidate controversy.In that state, campaign aides to Democratic Senate candidate Mary Peltola allegedly sought to recruit a third-party candidate with the same name as the Republican incumbent, Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska). Peltola's campaign has denied the <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/alaska-authorities-confirm-probe-into-democratic-senate-candidates-campaign-6111057?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge">claims</a>, while the state's governor and police force have confirmed an investigation.The DOJ has also provided a <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/doj-flags-more-than-400-suspected-noncitizens-on-washington-voter-rolls-6109172?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge">list</a> of around 400 alleged noncitizen voters to officials in Washington state. In <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/state-official-says-no-system-to-identify-whether-voters-are-noncitizens-6110960?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge">response</a>, Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs said Thursday that his state has no capacity to confirm whether individuals are U.S. citizens when they are registered to vote."We don't have a system that can identify whether someone is an actual noncitizen," he said at a news conference, adding it isn't "unusual for noncitizens" to be on state voter registration lists.President Donald Trump earlier this week <a href="https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/trump-offers-1-million-to-anyone-who-reports-voter-fraud-leading-to-conviction-6108976?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=ZeroHedge">said</a> he would offer a $1 million reward for anyone who can provide information leading to the arrest and conviction of individuals engaging in voter fraud in the upcoming election or in previous ones. No additional details about the reward have been provided.</div> <a class="username" href="https://cms.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden" lang="lang" title="View user profile.">Tyler Durden</a> <time class="datetime" datetime="2026-11-02T18:00:00-05:00" title="Monday, November 2, 2026 - 18:00">Mon, 11/02/2026 - 18:00</time> 
- · Supreme Court rejected DOJ request for California to set aside 20,000 ballots
- · Supreme Court did not provide rationale for its decision
Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to block 20,000 California ballotsdw.com · cred 7/10
The Trump administration had appealed to the Supreme Court over claims that a list of more than 20,000 ballots in California include non-US citizens.
- · Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to block 20,000 California ballots
- · Trump administration claimed non-US citizens are attempting to vote

The primary-source evidence wiki →