Trump Administration Drops California Ballot Lawsuit After Losing at Every Level
The Trump administration has dropped its lawsuit that tried to stop California from counting mail ballots from about 20,000 registered voters. On Friday, November 6, 2026, the Justice Department filed a notice of voluntary dismissal in federal court in Los Angeles, ending a case that had already been rejected by a district judge, by the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals twice, and by the Supreme Court. The government had argued that the ballots came from voters who were likely non-US citizens and should be set aside until their immigration status could be verified. California refused, the courts refused to order the state to segregate the votes, and the ballots were counted through the normal process after the midterm elections on November 3, 2026.
Quick Facts
| Detail | What Happened |
|---|---|
| Case | Justice Department lawsuit against California over about 20,000 mail ballots |
| Lawsuit filed | October 15, 2026 |
| What the government wanted | California to set aside the ballots until immigration status could be verified |
| District court | US District Judge David O. Carter rejected the request |
| Appeals court | The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the request twice |
| Supreme Court | Emergency appeal denied on Monday, November 2, 2026, the day before Election Day |
| Case dropped | Friday, November 6, 2026, by voluntary dismissal in Los Angeles |
| Ballots counted | California had processed roughly 9 million ballots by early Friday, with nearly 5 million still to be counted |
| Wider pattern | The Justice Department sued at least 30 states that refused to turn over voter data, losing almost all of the cases |
What the Lawsuit Tried to Do
The case began on October 15, 2026, when the Justice Department sued California in federal court. The government said that about 20,000 registered voters in the state were likely non-US citizens, based on a list compiled by federal officials. It asked the court to order California to set aside the mail ballots cast by those voters until their immigration status could be checked. In plain terms, the state would have had to pull those ballots out of the normal count and hold them apart.
California refused to do that voluntarily. State election officials said the ballots should move through the normal counting process like other mail ballots. The state did not accept the federal list as a sound basis for singling out thousands of registered voters and holding their votes aside. That refusal set up the central question: could a court, mid-election, order a state to separate ballots based on an allegation that the voters might not be citizens.
About 20,000 ballots were challenged, while officials had processed roughly 9 million ballots by early Friday, November 6, with nearly 5 million still to be counted. The government described the voters as likely non-citizens, an allegation rather than a proven finding about each person named.
How the Courts Ruled, Step by Step
The government lost at every level it tried. US District Judge David O. Carter rejected the request for an order forcing California to segregate the ballots. He said the order would wreak havoc and disrupt the election that was already underway, create a chilling effect on election workers and voters alike, and discount the votes of United States citizens. He also called the request part of a broad, ongoing pattern of attempted election interference.
The government then went to the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, and it lost there too. The appeals court rejected the request twice. With one day left before Election Day, the government turned to the Supreme Court. On Monday, November 2, 2026, the day before Election Day, the Supreme Court denied the emergency appeal in a one-line unsigned order, referred by Justice Elena Kagan, with no noted dissents. The government had no court order in hand when voters went to the polls on November 3. For more background, see how the Supreme Court and the Democratic landslide shaped the midterm story.
Why the Justice Department Walked Away
Four days after the Supreme Court denial, the Justice Department filed a two-page notice of voluntary dismissal in federal court in Los Angeles. A voluntary dismissal means the party that brought the case asks the court to end it. The filing did not claim a win: the government had run out of time and out of courts to try.
In the filing, Assistant US Attorney Julie Hamill wrote that the United States exhausted its appeals to obtain timely relief all the way to the Supreme Court. Timely relief was the whole point: the government wanted an order before the ballots were counted, and after the Supreme Court denial on November 2, there was no higher court left to ask. By the time of a previously scheduled court hearing on November 13, the filing said, California would have already commingled the challenged ballots with lawful ones.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta welcomed the dismissal. He said the administration abandoned an unlawful effort after losing at every level of the courts. The government lost before Judge Carter, lost twice before the 9th Circuit, and lost before the Supreme Court. The two-page filing did not answer that view. It rested on timing and exhausted appeals: no court was left to give the government the order it wanted, and the moment for that order had passed.
What Happens to the Ballots Now
The ballots at the center of the case are now part of the normal count. The dismissal filing said they would have been commingled with lawful ballots by November 13, which means they are counted through the same process as other mail ballots in California. There is no separate pile, no hold, and no segregation order in place. Roughly 9 million ballots had been processed by early Friday, with nearly 5 million still to be counted.
Democrats won the statewide contests in California by comfortable margins. The case was never about changing a statewide result, only about holding a specific group of ballots apart for checks. The courts rejected that claim.
What the Case Means for the Wider Fight Over Voter Data
This case did not stand alone. The Justice Department sued at least 30 states that refused to turn over voter data, losing almost all of the cases. That wider record shows the California lawsuit was part of a larger effort to obtain voter information from states. The pattern of losses suggests courts have been unwilling to force states to hand over voter data or to change how they handle ballots on the basis of these claims.
The case also shows the limits of using a list of names as the basis for an election order. A list that describes voters as likely non-citizens raises a question that a court will want answered: how accurate is the list, and what happens to lawful voters if it is wrong. The appointment of a special master to examine the accuracy of the federal list shows that the trial court took that question seriously.
The midterm elections add context to the story. The elections took place on November 3, 2026, and the results shaped the news that followed. Our coverage of the wider midterm picture includes a look at how data centers became a surprise issue on the 2026 midterm ballot, and a look at the governor races in Texas, Georgia, California, and New York. For now, the California case is over. The lawsuit was filed on October 15, rejected by a district judge, rejected twice by the 9th Circuit, denied by the Supreme Court on November 2, and dismissed by the government on November 6. The ballots were counted through the normal process, and the count continues.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did the Trump administration drop the California ballot lawsuit?
The Justice Department filed a notice of voluntary dismissal on Friday, November 6, 2026. In the filing, Assistant US Attorney Julie Hamill wrote that the United States exhausted its appeals to obtain timely relief all the way to the Supreme Court. The filing also said that by the time of a previously scheduled court hearing on November 13, California would have already commingled the challenged ballots with lawful ones. In short, the government had lost at every level, and the moment for the order it wanted had passed.
How many ballots were at issue in the case?
About 20,000 mail ballots were at issue. The Justice Department said those ballots came from registered voters whom federal officials alleged were likely non-US citizens, and it wanted California to set the ballots aside until immigration status could be verified. California refused, and the courts refused to order the state to do so. By comparison, California had processed roughly 9 million ballots by early Friday, November 6, with nearly 5 million still to be counted.
What did the courts decide before the case was dropped?
US District Judge David O. Carter rejected the request, saying it would wreak havoc and disrupt the election that was already underway, create a chilling effect on election workers and voters alike, and discount the votes of United States citizens. The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the request twice. The Supreme Court then denied the emergency appeal on Monday, November 2, 2026, the day before Election Day, in a one-line unsigned order, referred by Justice Elena Kagan, with no noted dissents.
Does the dismissal change the result of the midterm elections in California?
No. The case was about whether about 20,000 ballots should be set aside for extra checks, not about the outcome of any statewide contest. Democrats won the California statewide contests by comfortable margins. The dismissal means the challenged ballots were counted through the normal process.
Sources
- Reuters: Trump administration ends California balloting lawsuit
- MyNewsLA: Trump administration drops ballot segregation lawsuit
- EuropeSays: Coverage of the California ballot lawsuit dismissal
Final Thoughts
The end of this case was not sudden. It was the result of a fast and complete run through the courts, from a district judge in California to the 9th Circuit twice and then to the Supreme Court the day before Election Day. At each step, the government asked for the same thing: an order to pull about 20,000 ballots out of the normal count and hold them apart. At each step, the courts said no. When the Justice Department filed its dismissal on November 6, it did not argue that it had won. It said it had exhausted its appeals and that the ballots would already have been mixed with lawful ones by the time of the next hearing. The ballots were counted, and the count goes on.
