Federal judge weighs independent review of California ballot claims

In the midst of a contentious midterm election cycle, federal courts in Los Angeles are grappling with a dispute over voter eligibility that could influence how millions of ballots are processed. On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter indicated he is considering appointing an independent special master to examine claims that California's voter rolls include approximately 20,000 noncitizens. This move comes as the Justice Department seeks to prevent the counting of ballots from individuals it alleges are ineligible to vote.

The special master would evaluate the substance of the federal government's list and determine if counties can physically separate ballots from these specific voters. Carter noted that making a decision without an independent review would be too rushed. He expressed confidence that such a process could be completed before the state's December 11 deadline to certify election results. The judge emphasized that he wanted to vet the federal list thoroughly before ruling on the suit filed in mid-October.

A central point of contention is the logistical difficulty of separating ballots after they have been returned. California officials argue that once a mail ballot is submitted, it is detached from the envelope containing the voter's identification. This makes it impossible to isolate specific ballots in time for the certification deadline. More than 3 million ballots have already been returned in the state. The federal government has contested this assertion, arguing that the state can still manage the process without disrupting the election.

The Justice Department filed the lawsuit after California election officials missed a 48-hour deadline to review the federal list. The suit accuses state authorities of failing to address the alleged presence of noncitizens. First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli stated that the government's goal is to safeguard the election rather than prosecute tens of thousands of individuals. He argued that the credibility of the flagged names is the primary factor in the case. Essayli said the government has not asked to void any ballots but seeks to work with state officials to ensure accuracy.

Judge Carter voiced skepticism regarding the federal government's decision to sue rather than pursue criminal prosecutions. He pointed to recent arrests of 28 people in California who were accused of illegally registering to vote. From the bench, Carter told prosecutors, "You got a remedy for goodness sakes, go out and indict." He also addressed warnings that local election workers could face criminal prosecution if they did not follow federal demands. Carter stated that the court believes it would be wise for any threats to state and county election employees to cease immediately.

Lawyers for California and Los Angeles County questioned the reliability of the federal list. They noted that the government had not specified how or when it obtained the voter file. This lack of detail raised concerns that the list might be inaccurate or outdated. M. Patrick Moore, a lawyer for the Los Angeles County registrar's office, argued that the county would cooperate in any criminal prosecution of noncitizens. He said the county would provide records of noncitizens who voted if the federal government pursued that path.

The hearing focused heavily on the methodology used to compile the list of 20,000 names. A federal agent involved in the investigation stated in an affidavit that the list required roughly 800 federal employees to check each name manually. The agent claimed that a small sample of people on the list found to be citizens by Los Angeles County officials was a false finding. However, the federal filing conceded that some names could have been mistakenly included. The 20,000 individuals on the list represent a small fraction of California's 23 million registered voters.