The Trump administration has made a final attempt to involve the Supreme Court in the midterm elections by asking the justices to order California to segregate up to 20,000 ballots, citing concerns that some voters may be noncitizens.
This request, filed on the eve of the election, focuses on a list of over 20,000 names provided by the administration, which claims these individuals are "likely" noncitizens but are registered to vote in California. However, preliminary reviews by Los Angeles County officials suggest the list is highly unreliable. An initial sample of 200 names found that nearly 40 percent belong to individuals born in the U.S., and 56 percent are either no longer active registrations or have been canceled. Over 70 percent have never voted in California.
A similar situation unfolded in Nevada earlier this year, where the administration flagged 185 names as potential noncitizen voters. Subsequent investigation by Nevada determined all 185 individuals were, in fact, citizens.
The administration's legal argument hinges on a federal statute that makes it a misdemeanor for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. However, the statute does not authorize federal courts to order states to segregate ballots. Critics argue that if the administration believes individuals have violated the law, its recourse is to pursue criminal charges against those individuals, not to compel states to alter ballot-handling procedures.
Furthermore, another federal law requires states to maintain accurate voter lists by removing ineligible voters at least 90 days before an election. The administration's request, coming within this 90-day window, would thus be in violation of this law. The Supreme Court itself has previously stated that federal courts should generally avoid altering election rules shortly before an election.
Even if the Supreme Court were to order California to segregate the ballots, the state argues that doing so would be a significant logistical and administrative challenge. The provided list lacks sufficient information to identify voters, and the state has no existing system for segregating ballots at this stage.
Legal experts suggest that the administration's case lacks a strong legal foundation and that even if successful, it is unlikely to alter the outcome of the 2026 midterm elections, given the large number of voters in California. However, some suggest that such a ruling could potentially enable the administration to interfere with future elections by enabling harassment of state election officials with unsubstantiated lists.