On Monday, the Supreme Court refused an emergency petition from the Trump administration that aimed to mandate California election officials to separate mail ballots associated with over 20,000 individuals identified as ‘likely’ noncitizens.
This brief order was issued without any elaboration or noted dissent and came just hours after the filing, coinciding with the eve of the midterm elections. The Court took action without soliciting a response from California.
The administration’s argument was based on a list claiming that more than 20,000 people appeared on California’s voter rolls via publicly accessible registration data, yet federal records suggested they were likely not U.S. citizens. Solicitor General D. John Sauer informed the Court that these individuals were identified through comparisons with immigration databases.
The Justice Department emphasized that California’s policy of mailing ballots to every registered voter, coupled with limited independent verification of citizenship, created a scenario where ineligible ballots could potentially dilute valid votes. They requested courts to require the segregation of returned ballots from those individuals until their citizenship status could be validated.
POLL: Should Ilhan Omar Be Deported If Found Guilty Of Immigration Fraud?
BREAKING: The Supreme Court denied the Trump administration's emergency request to force California to set aside mail-in ballots from roughly 20,000 suspected noncitizens until their citizenship could be verified, one day before the midterm elections. pic.twitter.com/hjQzYV7Ht3
— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) November 2, 2026
The administration contended that segregation would not cancel valid votes but rather prevent the irreversible mixing of potentially illegal ballots with those cast legally. Once processed together, any dilution of rightful votes would be impossible to rectify.
Previous rulings had dismissed the request, with U.S. District Judge David Carter refusing a temporary restraining order, characterizing the methods used to identify the individuals as fraught with uncertainties and inaccuracies. Similarly, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in a split decision, opted not to intervene.
The appeals court majority determined that the federal government does not possess the authority to dictate state procedures for managing mail-in ballots and that mandating segregation could inadvertently prevent valid votes from being counted. They remarked that any adjustments in state election processes ought to be legislated by Congress.
Practically, the denial by the Supreme Court implies that California can continue its standard process of counting ballots without facing any judicial order to segregate those associated with the provided list.
Bill Essayli, currently the First Assistant U.S. Attorney for California’s Central District, has asserted that the over 20,000 figure mentioned is a minimum estimate, indicating it could be much higher. In a recent interview on Fox News, he noted, “it’s at a minimum of 20,000. That’s the floor,” suggesting the actual number could be significantly larger.
He also referenced an earlier communication from the Department of Homeland Security that identified nearly 200,000 voters as potential noncitizens. The figure of 20,000, he explained, results from a more detailed examination of federal records, offering a higher certainty of ineligibility. Essayli emphasized that this number is anticipated to grow as further records are scrutinized.
