9th Circuit Blocks Trump Effort to Suspend 20,000 California Ballots

The United States Constitution grants states primary authority over their own elections, a principle central to the current legal battle over mail-in ballots in California. On Friday, the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit rejected a second attempt by the Trump administration to suspend 20,000 ballots in the state ahead of the November 3 midterm elections.

The court’s decision arrives with less than four days remaining until voters head to the polls. The administration argued that nearly 20,000 “likely non-citizens” had received mail-in ballots and sought to prevent those specific votes from being counted. The 9th Circuit majority, composed of judges Mark Bennett and Gabriel Sanchez, ruled that the federal government’s request would violate the Constitution. They warned that the move would not just segregate ballots but cancel them and remove voters from the rolls.

The legal challenge stems from a list provided by the Justice Department to California officials on October 12. This was barely three weeks before the election. The administration claimed the list identified foreign nationals eligible to vote in federal races, a practice that is against the law in all 50 states. California refused to set aside the ballots without proof that the individuals named were indeed non-citizens. State officials said they have not received such evidence.

Accuracy of the federal list has become a point of contention. In Nevada, state authorities stated in September that the administration’s list erroneously identified citizens as non-citizens, with not a single name on the list being correct. Washington state officials have also found similar inaccuracies in lists they received. Despite these findings, the Trump administration maintains that widespread non-citizen voting is occurring, a claim that contrasts with historical data showing such fraud is extremely rare in the United States.

The 9th Circuit ruling follows a rapid sequence of legal maneuvers. The administration first filed suit on October 15 to stop the counting of these ballots. It then sought an emergency ruling from the appeals court to suspend the ballots, which the court rejected on Monday, saying lower courts needed more time to review the case. A lower court ruled against the administration on Wednesday, prompting the second appeal to the 9th Circuit that resulted in Friday’s decision.

Judge Patrick Bumatay, a Trump appointee, dissented from the majority opinion. He described the administration’s petition as a “reasonable request.” The majority, however, emphasized the risk to the public interest. They wrote that granting the request would harm the public by risking the disenfranchisement of eligible voters and putting the entire tabulation process in jeopardy. The court specifically noted its refusal to contravene the Elections Clause by undermining the Constitution’s plain text.

California officials, including Governor Gavin Newsom, have criticized the administration’s actions. In a news release following the initial lawsuit, Newsom called the move a “sad, desperate attempt” by the president to use a “politicized Justice Department” to suppress California voters. The state is a key battleground, with 52 members of the House of Representatives up for election on November 3.

Last week, the administration charged 28 foreign nationals in California with election-related infractions. Some of the accused told the Los Angeles Times they had never registered to vote, and the newspaper reported that some shared names with eligible voters. The constitutional framework allows Congress to pass regulations on voting procedures, but it grants states exclusive authority to administer their elections. The 9th Circuit’s Friday ruling stands as a barrier to the federal government’s direct intervention in California’s ballot counting process.