The Justice Department on Sunday defended its list of more than 20,000 suspected noncitizens registered to vote in California and asked a federal judge to consider sanctions after an immigrant rights group published an analysis critical of those noncitizen voting claims.
On Friday, U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg granted the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA, limited access to federal data tied to 20,000 people the Trump administration alleges are noncitizen voters in California. Boasberg, who sits in Washington, D.C., barred disclosure of any names and said the data could be used only to argue the plaintiffs’ legal standing in the case.
On Saturday, attorneys for the immigrant rights group filed court papers summarizing their analysis, which concluded that more than 40% of the people on the list do not show up in the state’s voter file. The filing also said 22 people on the list appeared likely to be naturalized U.S. citizens and asserted that thousands more U.S. citizens could be included.
The Justice Department responded Sunday that the group’s analysis was unrelated to the question of standing and therefore violated Boasberg’s order. In its filing, the department argued the report amounted to political advocacy that had no bearing on whether these particular plaintiffs could bring the lawsuit.
The department further suggested Boasberg refer the matter for investigation for possible criminal contempt of court.
Alberto Lammers, a spokesperson for UCLA’s Voting Rights Project, which brought the case and conducted the analysis for the immigrant rights group, said in an email statement that the plaintiffs and their experts complied with the court’s directives.
In a related development, the Justice Department on Sunday appealed a separate ruling issued Friday night by U.S. District Court Judge Trina L. Thompson in San Francisco. Thompson’s order blocked the department from compelling election offices to remove possible noncitizens from voter rolls, segregate their ballots, or threaten legal action. The department noted Thompson ruled before federal lawyers could file their initial arguments. A hearing on the appeal is set for Monday.
That case is among several setbacks for the Trump administration over its lists of alleged noncitizen voters. A federal judge in California previously rejected a demand to separate ballots cast by those voters, warning that such late-breaking directives could wreak havoc on the state’s election. Two appellate judges upheld that decision.
California election officials have said the list is riddled with errors and that they cannot complete the legally required, labor-intensive process to remove voters so close to the election. Voters attest to U.S. citizenship when registering and face potential felony prosecution if they cast a ballot while ineligible.
The administration has maintained its list was carefully built from California voter registration data and matched against federal citizenship records. The Justice Department has issued subpoenas to California election offices and warned officials that knowingly allowing noncitizens to vote could result in criminal charges.
What’s next in the noncitizen voting claims cases
Boasberg will weigh the Justice Department’s request for sanctions tied to the analysis disclosure, while Thompson’s courtroom will take up the department’s appeal of her order limiting enforcement actions on alleged noncitizen voters. Both rulings could shape how federal claims of ineligible voting are handled during the final days before ballots are cast.
The Justice Department on Sunday defended its list of more than 20,000 suspected noncitizens registered to vote in California and asked a federal judge to consider sanctions after an immigrant rights group published an analysis critical of those noncitizen voting claims.
On Friday, U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg granted the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA, limited access to federal data tied to 20,000 people the Trump administration alleges are noncitizen voters in California. Boasberg, who sits in Washington, D.C., barred disclosure of any names and said the data could be used only to argue the plaintiffs’ legal standing in the case.
On Saturday, attorneys for the immigrant rights group filed court papers summarizing their analysis, which concluded that more than 40% of the people on the list do not show up in the state’s voter file. The filing also said 22 people on the list appeared likely to be naturalized U.S. citizens and asserted that thousands more U.S. citizens could be included.
The Justice Department responded Sunday that the group’s analysis was unrelated to the question of standing and therefore violated Boasberg’s order. In its filing, the department argued the report amounted to political advocacy that had no bearing on whether these particular plaintiffs could bring the lawsuit.
The department further suggested Boasberg refer the matter for investigation for possible criminal contempt of court.
Alberto Lammers, a spokesperson for UCLA’s Voting Rights Project, which brought the case and conducted the analysis for the immigrant rights group, said in an email statement that the plaintiffs and their experts complied with the court’s directives.
In a related development, the Justice Department on Sunday appealed a separate ruling issued Friday night by U.S. District Court Judge Trina L. Thompson in San Francisco. Thompson’s order blocked the department from compelling election offices to remove possible noncitizens from voter rolls, segregate their ballots, or threaten legal action. The department noted Thompson ruled before federal lawyers could file their initial arguments. A hearing on the appeal is set for Monday.
That case is among several setbacks for the Trump administration over its lists of alleged noncitizen voters. A federal judge in California previously rejected a demand to separate ballots cast by those voters, warning that such late-breaking directives could wreak havoc on the state’s election. Two appellate judges upheld that decision.
California election officials have said the list is riddled with errors and that they cannot complete the legally required, labor-intensive process to remove voters so close to the election. Voters attest to U.S. citizenship when registering and face potential felony prosecution if they cast a ballot while ineligible.
The administration has maintained its list was carefully built from California voter registration data and matched against federal citizenship records. The Justice Department has issued subpoenas to California election offices and warned officials that knowingly allowing noncitizens to vote could result in criminal charges.
What’s next in the noncitizen voting claims cases
Boasberg will weigh the Justice Department’s request for sanctions tied to the analysis disclosure, while Thompson’s courtroom will take up the department’s appeal of her order limiting enforcement actions on alleged noncitizen voters. Both rulings could shape how federal claims of ineligible voting are handled during the final days before ballots are cast.
One Response