Election official processing voter registration materials at polling location.Trump Admin's Noncitizen Voter Purge Push Repeatedly Blocked by Courts
Left says
- •Courts have found the administration's noncitizen voter lists riddled with errors, including cases in Nevada where all 185 flagged individuals turned out to be citizens, showing the data underlying these purges is fundamentally unreliable.
- •The timing of these challenges — mere days before an election — raises alarm because federal law bars systematic voter roll purges within 90 days of an election precisely to prevent eligible voters from being wrongly disenfranchised without time to correct errors.
- •Threats of prosecution and jail time against state and local election officials who follow their own state laws amount to intimidation tactics that could chill both officials and voters, undermining the Voting Rights Act's protections against coercion.
- •Noncitizen voting is extremely rare and has never been shown to occur at a scale that could swing an election, making this campaign look like a pretext to sow doubt about results rather than a genuine integrity measure.
Right says
- •The Justice Department is simply enforcing existing federal law that makes it a crime for noncitizens to vote, and ensuring only eligible citizens cast ballots is a baseline requirement of fair elections, not an overreach.
- •When California refused to independently verify citizenship for voters flagged through cross-referencing public voter files against immigration and passport records, the state left federal officials little choice but to pursue judicial remedies.
- •Officials maintain they have no intention of targeting or investigating people believed to be U.S. citizens, and insist their actions are narrowly focused on identifying and prosecuting ineligible voters who dilute the legitimate votes of citizens.
- •Every action taken has been grounded in law and litigated openly in court, reflecting a legitimate effort to strengthen election security infrastructure rather than any attempt to interfere with the democratic process.
Common Take
High Consensus- Federal courts, including judges appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents, have repeatedly ruled against the administration's attempts to purge voters or obtain state voter data through these methods.
- Multiple independent investigations have found significant error rates in the federal government's lists of suspected noncitizen voters, including cases where flagged individuals were confirmed U.S.-born citizens.
- Both sides agree that only eligible citizens should be allowed to vote and that election integrity matters.
- The disputes are playing out through the court system rather than outside it, with both the administration and its challengers relying on litigation to resolve the conflicts.
The Arguments
Left argues
Courts have repeatedly found the administration's noncitizen voter lists factually wrong, as in Nevada where all 185 flagged individuals turned out to be citizens, demonstrating the data underlying these purges cannot be trusted to accurately identify ineligible voters.
Right counters
Isolated errors in flagging don't invalidate the underlying legal obligation to verify citizenship, and the DOJ argues it used the best available data while explicitly asking states to independently confirm status rather than acting unilaterally.
Right argues
The Justice Department is enforcing an existing federal criminal statute against noncitizen voting, and asking states to verify citizenship on a flagged list is a reasonable, lawful step rather than federal overreach into state election administration.
Left counters
A federal judge found Congress never gave the executive branch authority to force states to segregate or stop counting ballots this way, and the only lawful remedy for suspected illegal voting is prosecution of individuals, not mass disenfranchisement of lawfully cast ballots.
Left argues
Federal law bars systematic voter roll purges within 90 days of an election specifically to prevent eligible voters from being wrongly disenfranchised without adequate time to correct errors, and these challenges are landing right at that critical window.
Right counters
The timing reflects when the suspect data became available and litigation could proceed, not a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise voters, and prosecutors still moved quickly to bring actual indictments against confirmed violators the same day they sought judicial relief.
Left argues
Threatening state and local election officials with prosecution or jail time for following their own state laws functions as intimidation that could chill officials and voters alike, running afoul of Voting Rights Act protections against coercion.
Right counters
DHS and DOJ maintain their actions target only confirmed illegal voters and ineligible registrations, not officials acting in good faith, and litigating these disputes openly in court rather than through unilateral enforcement reflects restraint, not intimidation.
Right argues
When California declined to independently verify citizenship for voters flagged through legitimate cross-referencing of public voter files against immigration and passport records, the federal government had little recourse but to seek judicial intervention to protect election integrity.
Left counters
California's refusal was justified because preliminary investigation found that over 25% of flagged voters listed a U.S. birthplace, showing the list itself was unreliable and that verifying it on the state's terms was the responsible, not obstructive, course of action.
Challenge Questions
These questions target genuine internal contradictions — meant to provoke honest reflection.
Right asks Left
“If noncitizen voting is as rare as claimed, why does verifying citizenship status for a relatively small, specifically flagged list of voters constitute disenfranchisement rather than a reasonable confirmatory step before ballots are counted?”
Left asks Right
“If the administration insists it has no intention of targeting people it believes are citizens, how does it explain repeatedly submitting lists — in Nevada, California, and Washington — where independent review found large proportions or even all flagged individuals were in fact citizens?”
Outlier Report
Left Fringe
Groups like the ACLU and some Democratic officials (e.g., statements from figures aligned with Alex Padilla's office) who frame any citizenship verification effort as inherently voter suppression regardless of data quality represent roughly 15-20% of the left, more absolutist than the median Democrat who supports some verification safeguards.
Right Fringe
Figures like Stephen Miller and some DOJ officials who publicly frame noncitizen voting as a large-scale, election-altering conspiracy despite minimal evidence represent roughly 20-25% of the right; this is more extreme than the median Republican voter who supports verification but may not believe it's swinging elections.
Noise Assessment
Substantial; cable news and social media amplify the most dramatic claims (mass fraud vs. mass disenfranchisement) far beyond what the underlying numbers (hundreds of flagged voters, mostly confirmed citizens) actually support.
Sources (5)
<p>The 2026 <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/20/midterms-early-voting-states-data" target="_blank">midterms</a> already face a messy pileup of lawsuits and ballot battles, raising fears about election confidence before voters even finish <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/29/midterm-early-voting-trump-unaffiliated-voters" target="_blank">casting</a><a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/29/midterm-early-voting-trump-unaffiliated-voters" target="_blank"> ballots</a>.</p><p><strong>Why it matters:</strong> Election challenges aren't unusual, but as the <a href="https://www.axios.com/politics-policy/donald-trump" target="_blank">Trump</a> administration continues to make false claims about widespread voter fraud, officials are juggling fights over voter lists, mail-ballot rules and election certification challenges.</p><hr /><p><strong>What they're saying: </strong>"The types of challenges that we are seeing pre-election, this close to election day, are very unusual, and mostly because they are coming from the federal government," Jonathan Diaz of the Campaign Legal Center told Axios.</p><ul><li>"These lawsuits are frivolous," Diaz said, adding they could "create doubt in the minds of the public about the legitimacy of the election process."</li></ul><p><strong>The other side: </strong>The White House referred Axios to <a href="https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/2115816692165103984" target="_blank">comments</a> President Trump <a href="https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/2115817712517586962" target="_blank">made</a> to the media. </p><ul><li>The Department of Justice did not respond to Axios' request for comment.</li></ul><p><em>Here's some of the ways chaos and uncertainty have shaped the 2026 midterms:</em></p><h2>California</h2><p><strong>In the Golden State,</strong> the Trump administration asked state election officials to set aside ballots from roughly <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/15/trump-doj-california-voters-ballots-lawsuit" target="_blank">20,000 registered voters</a> whom the DOJ suspects are noncitizens.</p><ul><li>A federal judge <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/judge-rules-california-ballots-alleged-non-citizen-voters-trump-doj-rcna606100" target="_blank">rejected</a> that push Wednesday night, warning that the administration lacked sufficient evidence to justify potentially disenfranchising eligible voters.</li><li>The judge noted that the DOJ had made similar claims in neighboring Nevada, where election officials determined that 185 voters the DOJ had flagged as noncitizens were actually U.S. citizens.</li><li>Diaz told Axios that, from his perspective as a voting-rights advocate, the California battle is "not a real lawsuit. It's a political press release that they just happened to submit to the court."</li></ul><p><strong>The other side: </strong>The White House directed questions about the ruling to <a href="https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/2115816692165103984" target="_blank">remarks</a> Trump made Thursday, in which he said "California is very corrupt," and the state's elections are "extremely corrupt." </p><ul><li>He did not provide evidence for his claims. </li></ul><h2>Washington</h2><p><strong>On Monday,</strong> the two U.S. attorneys' offices in Washington state <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwa/pr/federal-data-shows-hundreds-non-citizens-registered-vote-washington" target="_blank">asked</a> the state to set aside ballots from more than 400 people they allege were illegally registered to vote.</p><ul><li>The letter mirrors similar demands sent to California before the Trump administration sued.</li></ul><p><strong>Washington Secretary of State </strong>Steve Hobbs <a href="https://www.sos.wa.gov/about-office/news/2026/washington-secretary-state-steve-hobbs-response-doj-letter-about-voter-rolls" target="_blank">fired back</a> Wednesday, tearing into the U.S. attorneys for making the request so close to Election Day and calling the timing "profoundly disappointing."</p><ul><li>Hobbs said a preliminary investigation confirmed that the federal list includes U.S. citizens and is unreliable. He asked prosecutors to provide individualized proof of ineligibility.</li></ul><h2>North Carolina</h2><p><strong>Nearly 4,000 mail-in ballots, or about 6%,</strong> processed in North Carolina through Oct. 24 have been <a href="https://www.commoncause.org/north-carolina/press/absentee_ballot_analysis_2026/" target="_blank">flagged</a> for problems that, if not fixed, could invalidate voters' choices.</p><ul><li>Time is running out for those voters to address the issues, and hundreds have yet to respond to notifications about their ballots.</li></ul><p><strong>The rejections appear</strong> to stem in part from new guidance issued by the GOP-controlled state Board of Elections requiring the inner ballot envelope to be sealed, even if the outer envelope is already sealed.</p><h2>Alaska</h2><p><strong>In Alaska's Senate race</strong>, two men named Dan Sullivan are on the ballot, Sen. Dan S. Sullivan and retired teacher Dan J. Sullivan. </p><ul><li>New <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/28/alaska-senate-dan-sullivan-trump-peltola-spoiler-scheme" target="_blank">reporting</a> from The New York Times on Wednesday alleged that aides to Democratic candidate Mary Peltola helped recruit the other Dan Sullivan in an apparent attempt to confuse voters and siphon votes away from the incumbent senator. Peltola's campaign denies any involvement.</li><li>Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy <a href="https://x.com/govdunleavy/status/2115669883149222169" target="_blank">ordered</a> an investigation Wednesday for investigators to determine whether the alleged scheme violated Alaska law and whether criminal charges or civil action are warranted.</li><li>The DOJ has separately <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/23/trump-administration-sues-alaska-dan-sullivan" target="_blank">sued</a> to delay certification of the Senate election if the incumbent loses and votes for the other Sullivan could have changed the outcome.</li></ul><p><strong>Go deeper:</strong> <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/08/27/trump-voting-agenda-mail-ballots-save-act-voter-rolls" target="_blank">Trump is pulling every lever to reshape U.S. elections</a></p>
<p>Some of the biggest vulnerabilities in <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/25/trump-doj-midterms-interference" target="_blank">election security</a> are lying in plain sight.</p><p><strong>Why it matters:</strong> There's no credible evidence that voting-system vulnerabilities have been exploited to change election results. But researchers have found isolated flaws that threaten ballot secrecy, accurate vote recording and independent verification of results.</p><hr /><p><strong>The big picture:</strong> Voter-marked paper ballots and rigorous audits are the gold standard for trustworthy elections, election-security researchers and activists tell Axios.</p><ul><li>Researchers have challenged unfounded claims that elections were stolen through hacking while also warning against dismissing real vulnerabilities in voting systems.</li><li>"A vulnerability is not an exploit," Philip Stark, a retired UC Berkeley statistics professor<strong> </strong>who developed an audit protocol for checking paper ballots, said at a recent conference. "You can leave a key under your doormat, and that doesn't mean someone takes the key and opens your door."</li></ul><p><strong>Zoom in:</strong> Election security experts interviewed by Axios found these vulnerabilities in parts of the U.S.:</p><p><strong>1. Paperless voting:</strong> Louisiana is the last remaining state to use paperless voting machines statewide on Election Day. Voters press buttons to select their candidates, and the machines record their votes electronically without producing a paper ballot.</p><ul><li>That leaves no independent record to check whether votes were counted correctly. Most other states retired the machines after researchers exposed their vulnerabilities to hacking and the inability to independently audit their results.</li><li>Election security expert and computer scientist J. Alex Halderman, of the University of Michigan, called Louisiana "the dinosaur of American elections."</li><li>Louisiana's secretary of state's office declined an interview request, but in a <a href="https://www.sos.la.gov/news-events/procurement-solicitation-issued-for-new-voting-system-network" target="_blank">press release</a> said the state is expected to award a new election equipment contract at the end of the year.</li></ul><p><strong>2. Ballot-marking devices (BMDs)</strong> let voters select candidates on a touchscreen before printing a paper ballot. Researchers <a href="https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~appel/papers/bmd-insecure.pdf" target="_blank">warn</a> the machines are vulnerable to hacking and errors, and studies show voters often fail to catch mistakes on the printout.</p><ul><li>A <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5SOdkMU3SU" target="_blank">demonstration</a> at the hacktivist conference Def Con in 2025 showed how a machine which an Auburn professor obtained from public sources could be manipulated by altering what the voter sees and the choices they mark or by changing the vote tally. </li><li>"That's the kind of thing that our chief information officer and his team does track," said Blake Evans, executive director for Georgia's secretary of state office, when asked broadly about vulnerabilities exposed at Def Con. "[W]e do have the physical security with the fields and the counties that store their equipment securely in secure places."</li><li>Roughly 23% of U.S. registered voters live in jurisdictions that exclusively<strong> </strong>use BMDs for in-person voting, according to the nonprofit <a href="https://verifiedvoting.org/verifier/#mode/navigate/map/voteEquip/mapType/ppEquip/year/2026" target="_blank">Verified Voting</a>. BMDs are an essential accessibility tool for voters who can't mark a paper ballot on their own, but security researchers favor offering them alongside hand-marked paper ballots. </li></ul><p><strong>3. A software flaw in Georgia's </strong>vote-counting system could be used to expose how individual voters cast their ballots, according to research from Princeton University.</p><ul><li>Researcher Max Springer <a href="https://blog.citp.princeton.edu/2026/08/03/an-algorithmic-failure-beneath-the-secret-ballot/" target="_blank">used</a> public voter records and roughly $20 in AI credits to reconstruct the order in which nearly all in-person ballots were cast in the Georgia counties he studied.</li><li>With an additional public record, Springer was <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1epVVijBw6GKEukEFiSuTuodJ8hVLCVXG/view" target="_blank">able to match</a> individual voters to their ballots, as he demonstrated with two counties and 2,200 votes in his study.<strong><em> </em></strong><em></em>He wrote that the method could be applied to other counties.</li><li>Researchers first exposed the bug in <a href="https://dvsorder.org/#patch" target="_blank">2022</a>, and Dominion Voting Systems (now Liberty Vote) released a patch the following year. At the time, about 21 states were using the software. There's no centralized database that tracks when these software updates are implemented around the country.<strong> </strong>The Georgia secretary of state's office said "there haven't been any significant software updates since 2019."</li></ul><p><strong>State of play: </strong>Georgia's secretary of state's office said it has shared guidance with counties to address the ballot secrecy issue, and it plans to limit the exposure by not making all of its election data public<strong> </strong>in November.</p><ul><li>Liberty Vote declined to comment. In a post on its website, the company <a href="https://libertyvote.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Liberty-Vote-FAQ.pdf" target="_blank">says</a> every "Liberty Vote system is tested, certified, and verified to meet the highest standards of election security and reliability in accordance with all applicable state and federal requirements."</li></ul><p><strong>The bottom line:</strong> Stark says voters should be aware of two things that can be simultaneously true:</p><ul><li>"The systems<strong><em> </em></strong><em></em>are garbage from a software and cybersecurity point of view. There's lots of ways that they can fail."</li><li>"And there is no direct evidence that anything has happened on a large scale that changed the outcome of say the presidential election or federal election."</li></ul><p><em>Editor's note: This story has been corrected to show that the voting machine used by an Auburn professor was obtained from public sources (not through court-sanctioned access).</em></p>
<p>A federal judge restricted <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/09/dhs-ice-stelson-democrat-congress-pennsylvania" target="_blank">Department of Homeland Security</a> investigations into suspected noncitizen voting in nine states, citing concerns that the agency's tactics could intimidate eligible voters. </p><p><strong>Why it matters: </strong>With the <a href="https://www.axios.com/politics-policy/2026-midterm-elections" target="_blank">midterms</a> less than two weeks away, the ruling curtails a <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/14/doj-california-noncitizen-voters-mail-ballots" target="_blank">central part</a> of the <a href="https://www.axios.com/politics-policy/donald-trump" target="_blank">Trump</a> administration's <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/21/trump-election-interference-lawsuit-democrats" target="_blank">efforts to investigate</a> suspected noncitizen voting.</p><hr /><p><strong>Driving the news: </strong>The ruling, issued late Wednesday, blocks election-related field operations and interviews under the government's <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/09/14/trump-dhs-voter-data-false-statements" target="_blank">Unlawful Voter Initiative</a> that involve or are likely to involve U.S. citizens.</p><ul><li>California-based U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín also blocked the administration from conducting operations against likely citizens in states relying on records generated by its voter-matching policy.</li></ul><p><strong>Zoom in: </strong>Martínez-Olguín wrote in her <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.479338/gov.uscourts.cand.479338.87.0.pdf" target="_blank">order</a> that the groups that sued provided "substantial evidence" that the government's "intimidating conduct" was "directly interfering with their members' right to encourage voters to participate in the 2026 midterm elections."</p><ul><li>Her order stated that DHS had compiled a "target list" of individuals from a variety of sources, including state voter rolls and commercial data.</li><li>But Martínez-Olguín cast doubt on the accuracy of the administration's data, warning of a "high likelihood of error in review because there is no federal database containing citizenship status of U.S. residents."</li><li>Court filings indicated that officers were ordered to prioritize probes in California, Connecticut, Georgia, Missouri, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, Washington and Wisconsin.</li></ul><p><strong>Catch up quick: </strong>Democratic Sens. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) and Alex Padilla (Calif.) released a whistleblower <a href="https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/091326_-_senate_whistleblower_letter_dhs_uscis_combined_signedpdf.pdf" target="_blank">report</a> last month alleging that officials had diverted fraud and national security personnel to the Unlawful Voter Initiative using "highly questionable data" and methods.</p><ul><li>The whistleblower disclosure alleged that officers were directed, in violation of state law, to access sensitive voter information under minimal training and significant pressure.</li></ul><p><strong>The other side: </strong>"DHS is laser focused on identifying, prosecuting, and removing aliens who vote and dilute the votes of U.S. citizens," a spokesperson told Axios in a statement, adding that the department has "no plans to question or investigate people we believe to be U.S. citizens."</p><ul><li>Responding to the nonprofits and local government entities that sued, the administration argued in court that DHS "reasonably decided to make use of the best data it had available to it to perform its law enforcement role, notwithstanding that the information may not be perfect in all cases."</li><li>The administration also contended that the allegations of voter intimidation were too vague.</li><li>The White House referred Axios to DHS for comment. </li></ul><p><strong>Zoom out: </strong>Courts have repeatedly blocked the Trump administration's attempts to obtain <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/08/05/trump-doj-voter-roll-lawsuits-fail" target="_blank">state voter data</a>, but the administration has pursued <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/09/25/trump-administration-revamped-voter-database-supreme-court" target="_blank">suspected noncitizen voting</a> — which is rare — through other means.</p><ul><li>Last week, the administration sued California and election officials over claims that suspected ineligible voters received mail-in ballots for the election, asking a court to delay about 20,000 voters from having their ballots counted.</li><li>But as Axios' <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/15/trump-doj-california-voters-ballots-lawsuit" target="_blank">Brittany Gibson notes</a>, administration-created lists of potential noncitizens on voter rolls have been found less than accurate before, including in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/24/us/politics/nevada-voters-homeland-security-trump.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share" target="_blank">Nevada</a>.</li></ul><p><strong>What we're watching: </strong>The administration faces continuing legal challenges to its election-related initiatives ahead of the Nov. 3 midterms.</p><ul><li>On Tuesday, Democratic groups <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/21/trump-election-interference-lawsuit-democrats" target="_blank">sued the government</a>, accusing it of using unfounded fraud claims as a cudgel to insert itself into election administration.</li></ul><p><strong>Go deeper: </strong><a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/17/trump-october-midterms-controversy" target="_blank">Trump's October barrage</a></p>
<p>Democratic groups sued the <a href="https://www.axios.com/politics-policy/donald-trump" target="_blank">Trump</a> administration Tuesday, accusing it of using unfounded <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/09/23/trump-voter-fraud-citizens" target="_blank">voter fraud claims</a> to muscle its way into how states run elections.</p><p><strong>Why it matters:</strong> The groups say the administration is issuing a <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/16/trumps-maga-allies-openly-discuss-martial-law" target="_blank">stream of threats</a> to intimidate and bully both voters and election officials.</p><hr /><ul><li>They're asking a judge to declare the administration's actions unlawful and block further interference.</li></ul><p><strong>Driving the news: </strong>The <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.297829/gov.uscourts.dcd.297829.1.0.pdf" target="_blank">lawsuit</a> condemns the administration for targeting state voter rolls by insisting that local officials review federally compiled lists of alleged noncitizens on their voter rolls.</p><ul><li>The suit also alleges that the administration is improperly demanding that states deny ballots to registered voters based on those federal lists.</li><li>The Democrat-aligned groups also claim the administration has attempted to intimidate state and local officials by threatening them with jail time or prosecution.</li></ul><p><strong>Case in point: </strong>The lawsuit cites a Department of Homeland Security claim that Nevada had nearly 16,000 noncitizens on its voter rolls.</p><ul><li>The department later claimed that it had confirmed 185 of those people were noncitizens. State records later indicated that all 185 were citizens.</li><li>The DOJ also demanded that California deny ballots to <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/15/trump-doj-california-voters-ballots-lawsuit" target="_blank">more than 20,000 people</a> based on a federal list that flagged them as suspected ineligible voters, the lawsuit says.</li><li>A preliminary investigation by Los Angeles County investigators found that more than 25% of those flagged listed a U.S. birthplace, and others already had their voter registrations canceled.</li></ul><p><strong>What they're saying: </strong>"Department of Justice and DHS officials have sought to bolster their interference efforts through a persistent stream of threats and intimidation directed towards state and local election officials across the country," the groups' attorneys wrote.</p><ul><li>"Defendants' coercive threats of legal retaliation against state officials, including even potential imprisonment, for simply following state law and aiding registered voters in casting their ballots objectively intimidate voters and election officials alike, in violation of Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act."</li><li>The suit, brought by Democratic organizations including the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Democratic leaders and a voter, names Trump, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security, and their respective heads as defendants.</li></ul><p><strong>The other side: </strong>"The Justice Department enforces federal election law, and election integrity is a top priority," a DOJ spokesperson told Axios.</p><ul><li>"Every action the Department has taken to protect the integrity of this year's elections is grounded in the law and being litigated in open court. Ensuring that only eligible citizens vote and that every lawful ballot is counted is a requirement of federal law," according to the emailed statement.</li><li>"We notified California that noncitizens are likely registered to vote, and we asked the state to independently verify the citizenship of any ballots cast by people on a list that we provided. It refused to do so. Federal law doesn't permit this willful blindness." </li></ul><p><strong>A White House</strong> spokesperson told Axios that while "Democrats and the media continue to dismiss concerns about voter fraud, the Trump Administration is taking decisive lawful action to protect our elections including prosecuting election crimes, strengthening election infrastructure security, and protecting vulnerable voters from fraud and coercion."</p><ul><li>A spokesperson for Homeland Security told Axios that the department's "message to aliens who vote in American elections is clear: we will find you, arrest you, and you will face the consequences — including criminal charges and deportation."</li></ul><p><strong>Zoom out: </strong>The suit also argues that the president has <a href="https://www.axios.com/2025/10/31/trump-immigration-citizenship-federal-judge" target="_blank">no constitutional authority</a> to decide who gets to vote or dictate how states count ballots.</p><ul><li><a href="https://www.axios.com/2021/06/23/michigan-voter-fraud" target="_blank">Investigations</a> and <a href="https://www.axios.com/2021/10/22/wisconsin-audit-no-widespread-voter-fraud" target="_blank">audits</a> have found no evidence of widespread voter fraud. <a href="https://www.axios.com/2024/03/30/no-big-wave-immigrants-voting-illegally-trump" target="_blank">Research</a> shows noncitizen voting is rare, and there's no evidence it occurs on a scale that could swing elections.</li></ul><p><strong>Go deeper:</strong> <a href="https://www.axios.com/2026/10/15/trump-doj-california-voters-ballots-lawsuit" target="_blank">Trump sues California to prevent counting 20,000 voters' ballots</a></p><p><em>Editor's note: This story has been updated with comment from the White House and DHS.</em></p>
<p>A federal judge refused to force California to set aside mailed ballots from more than 20,000 people the Justice Department says are noncitizens.</p> <p>The post <a href="https://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2026/10/29/federal-judge-blocks-doj-effort-sequester-20000-california-ballots/" rel="nofollow">Federal Judge Blocks DOJ Effort to Sequester 20,000 California Ballots</a> appeared first on <a href="https://www.breitbart.com" rel="nofollow">Breitbart</a>.</p>