Appeals Court Skeptical of Trump Administration’s Lawsuit Over California Voter Rolls

A federal appeals court expressed skepticism Sunday regarding the Justice Department’s lawsuit against California, which seeks to compel the state to remove roughly 20,000 names from its voter rolls based on claims they belong to noncitizens. The three-judge panel, including two appointees of President Donald Trump and one appointee of President Joe Biden, heard arguments after the DOJ filed suit earlier this month accusing California of failing to review the list of alleged noncitizens before sending mail-in ballots for the upcoming midterm elections. California officials countered that the list is unverified and contains the names of lawful voters, with preliminary analysis of 200 names revealing that nearly 40% indicate U.S. citizenship and 71.2% have no voting history. Circuit Judge Mark Bennett, a Trump appointee, repeatedly questioned the court’s jurisdiction and raised constitutional concerns about the lawsuit, stating, “I don’t see how we have jurisdiction.” The Justice Department had requested a ruling by Tuesday, prior to a scheduled district court hearing, but the appeals court did not issue a decision. The DOJ also sent letters to every county in California requesting assistance in identifying potential noncitizen voters, urging them to cooperate to avoid “significant federal scrutiny and legal exposure.” The effort follows accusations by Trump that the Democratic Party benefits from widespread noncitizen voting, a claim he has repeatedly made, and has raised alarm among voting rights advocates who question the accuracy of the list and fear voter intimidation.

Where they differ

• Al Jazeera emphasized the broader context of the Trump administration’s efforts to crack down on alleged noncitizen voting ahead of the midterms and highlighted Trump’s past accusations of voter fraud in California.
• ABC News focused more on the procedural aspects of the case, detailing the DOJ’s requests for expedited rulings and the timeline of events.
• Al Jazeera reported on Trump’s denouncement of California’s primaries and announcement of a US Attorneys’ Office investigation, details absent from the ABC News report.

What is not yet known

• The accuracy of the list of 20,000 alleged noncitizen voters remains unverified, and the sources do not detail how the Trump administration compiled the list.
• The appeals court’s final decision on the lawsuit is still pending.

Background

• The Justice Department filed a lawsuit against California seeking to prevent the counting of approximately 20,000 mail-in ballots from individuals identified as potentially non-citizens [Fact Refinery, 2026-10-15].
• President Donald Trump has repeatedly made claims of widespread voter fraud, including accusations that non-citizens are voting illegally, particularly in California [Al Jazeera, 2026-10-15].
• The upcoming midterm elections are highly contested, with Democrats hoping to expand their control of Congress and Republicans seeking to maintain their majorities [Fact Refinery, 2026-10-18].
• The Justice Department is currently investigating former Trump aide Corey Lewandowski over potential conflicts of interest related to government contracts [Fact Refinery, 2026-10-23].

Our reading

Our reading is that the Justice Department’s lawsuit, despite skepticism from the appeals court, is part of a broader pattern of action and rhetoric from the Trump administration focused on questioning the integrity of the electoral process. The court’s questioning of jurisdiction and constitutional concerns, coupled with the lack of a decision, suggests a significant hurdle for the DOJ’s efforts. The request for expedited rulings and letters to counties appear to be attempts to pressure California and create a narrative of federal oversight.

What to watch

• The appeals court’s final decision on the lawsuit, which will determine whether the DOJ’s request for a ruling will be granted [sources do not detail a date].
• The results of California’s preliminary analysis of the list of 20,000 alleged non-citizens, to assess the accuracy of the claims [sources do not detail a date].
• The district court hearing previously scheduled before the appeals court intervention, to see if it proceeds and what rulings are made [sources do not detail a date].

Was this useful? 👍 0 👎 0

---

Read the original coverage