Judge Bars Federal Threats Against Election Workers Days Before Midterms

Judge Bars Federal Threats Against Election Workers Days Before Midterms

A late-Friday order freezes federal pressure tactics

U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson of the Northern District of California issued a temporary restraining order late Friday, October 30, barring the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security from threatening or coercing any state or local election officials through November 16. With the November 3 midterms four days away, Thompson wrote that there was no reason to delay: ballots had been issued, Americans had begun voting, and workers had begun processing ballots.

Three demands banned: purges, ballot denials, segregation

The order bars the administration from demanding that election workers remove voters from statewide rolls, refuse ballots to specific voters, or segregate and decline to count midterm ballots based on the government's own list of alleged noncitizens. It also bars threats of criminal prosecution for noncompliance. Thompson found that although the government claims to target unlawful noncitizen voting, its actions are likely to interfere with election administration and disenfranchise lawful voters.

Unions sued a day earlier alleging intimidation

The case was brought by the Service Employees International Union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the NAACP and the League of United Latin American Citizens. The suit accuses the Justice Department of carrying out efforts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce election workers, alleging violations of the Voting Rights Act and an unconstitutional intrusion into state control of elections.

A 20,000-ballot fight built on a shaky list

The standoff began October 13, when federal officials wrote to California Secretary of State Shirley Weber and the Los Angeles County registrar demanding they sequester ballots of roughly 20,000 registered voters the government called likely noncitizens. After the state and county refused, DOJ sued them in federal court in Los Angeles. On October 28, U.S. District Judge David Carter rejected the government's bid to force California to set aside about 20,000 mail ballots, ruling that registered voters must not lose their rights over unfounded allegations from a procedure rife with uncertainty and errors.

Subpoenas land in Los Angeles as voting starts

The Associated Press obtained subpoenas to Los Angeles County election officials seeking documents and communications tied to federal letters sent in July and October, plus records of steps to keep alleged noncitizen votes uncounted. At least three county election officials were ordered to appear before a grand jury the day after the election, timing the plaintiffs cite as pressure designed to chill normal ballot processing.

A second court loss within hours

Around the same time as Thompson's order, a federal appeals court separately refused to let the government force California to set aside the disputed ballots. The paired rulings leave the administration with almost no judicial path to quarantine the contested votes before Election Day. A Homeland Security spokesperson had earlier said the department is focused on identifying, prosecuting, and removing noncitizens who vote, a justification neither court accepted.

Who gains: counter workers first, then the whole country

The immediate beneficiaries are frontline ballot processors in Los Angeles County working under subpoenas and grand-jury summons. But the order's language covers any state or local election officials, giving administrators nationwide a court-backed shield to keep counting without weighing federal criminal threats.

What comes next: briefs Monday, hearing mid-November

Under Thompson's schedule, the Justice Department must respond to the bid for a longer preliminary injunction by noon Monday, November 2. The plaintiffs reply by November 5, with a hearing set for November 13. The restraining order runs through November 16, covering the full count and canvass. With House and Senate control on the line November 3, the fate of California's disputed 20,000 ballots will likely remain unsettled until after that hearing. Discussion: How should the system weigh catching a tiny number of ineligible votes against procedures that frighten the very workers who count ballots? Have you ever worried your own vote might not get counted, and what would restore your trust?