US Supreme Court rejects Trump's push to isolate 20,000 California ballots over citizenship claims

Trump administration argued that setting aside the disputed ballots was a limited measure that would allow officials to verify voter eligibility without preventing legitimate votes from eventually being counted.The US Supreme Court on Monday rejected the Trump administration’s emergency request to set aside around 20,000 ballots in California over claims that the voters may not be US citizens. The decision came a day before the final day of voting in the crucial midterm elections, dealing another legal setback to US President Donald Trump’s efforts to intervene in the electoral process.The court refused to intervene in the dispute involving voters flagged by the federal government as likely noncitizens on California’s voter rolls. It did not explain its decision. No justice publicly dissented.The rejection came without the court asking California officials to respond to the administration’s appeal.California governor Gavin Newsom welcomed the decision, saying on X, “The Court rejected Trump’s emergency request without even asking the other side to respond. Democracy won.”The ruling marks another setback for the administration, which has faced repeated defeats in its efforts to have the disputed ballots kept separate until the voters’ citizenship status is verified.California Attorney General Rob Bonta said courts had rejected the administration’s attempts to interfere in the state’s elections four times, including at the district court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.“Courts have now rejected the Trump Administration’s attempts to interfere in California’s elections not once, not twice, not three times, but four times — from the district court to the Ninth Circuit to the U.S. Supreme Court,” Bonta said.“This latest decision should put an end to the Administration’s attempt to disrupt California’s elections through emergency court orders," he added.Voting by noncitizens rare in USThe Trump administration has made identifying suspected noncitizen voters a priority this year, despite such cases being rare in the US. It argued that setting aside the disputed ballots was a limited measure that would allow officials to verify voter eligibility without preventing legitimate votes from eventually being counted.However, California officials questioned the reliability of the federal government's list, saying it contained errors and could lead to eligible voters being disenfranchised.The administration's request also faced criticism over its timing, with election officials pointing out that it came only weeks before voting concluded. The Justice Department has acknowledged that its list was not entirely reliable.During a hearing on whether to lift an order preventing the administration from threatening to prosecute election workers who allowed potentially ineligible voters to cast ballots, US District Court Judge Trina Thompson questioned the accuracy of the federal data.“Would you agree there's a high error rate?” the San Francisco-based judge asked Justice Department attorney Kenneth Kao.“That's a fair statement,” Kao said. “That's why we ask for the registrars' aid in verifying these are all valid voters.”However, Bill Essayli, the federal prosecutor overseeing the Justice Department's Los Angeles office, expressed confidence that the people on the list were not eligible to vote.“This isn’t speculation. This isn’t a theory,” Essayli said at a news conference, while later acknowledging that the list could contain errors.Lower courts also reject administration's requestThe Supreme Court's decision followed a series of rulings in favour of California. A district court had earlier rejected the Justice Department's request, warning that separating the ballots could disrupt the election and undermine public confidence in the democratic process.US District Judge David O. Carter said such a move could “wreak havoc” on the midterm elections.“If the Executive can discount votes and threaten an ongoing election due to unproven allegations, then our democracy is in danger,” Carter wrote.A 2-1 appeals court panel subsequently upheld his order. One judge appointed by Trump and another appointed by former President Joe Biden voted in favour of California. The third judge, also appointed by Trump, dissented, arguing that the state's refusal to separate the ballots encouraged the “violation of federal law”.In a separate development on Monday, US District Judge James Boasberg ruled against the administration's attempts to make last-minute demands of California election officials, saying they likely violated the Constitution.“The Executive Branch has likely violated the Constitution’s Elections Clause, which commits authority over election rules to the states and Congress alone,” Boasberg wrote.However, in a separate ruling later on Monday, Boasberg declined to issue another order restraining the administration. He said the Democratic groups that had filed the lawsuit lacked legal standing and that the issue had already been addressed by states and courts.Millions of California ballots already returnedCalifornia has been conducting voting by mail since early October. The state sends ballots to all its approximately 23 million registered voters. More than 6 million ballots had already been returned, according to Associated Press election data.State election officials had argued that identifying and separating the disputed ballots at this stage would be logistically impossible.The Supreme Court had also rejected Trump's attempt to restrict mail-in voting across the country in September, although it has sided with his administration in several other emergency appeals.Reacting to Monday's decision, Kristen Clarke, general counsel of the NAACP, criticised the administration's efforts.“The DOJ’s baseless challenge was yet another attempt at federal overreach and voter suppression,” she said.“We will not stand for the Trump Administration’s bullying campaign, and we will continue to use every tool at our disposal to ensure the American people’s voices are not silenced.”