AI Generated Image (not the actual court filing)
The Justice Department walked away from its California noncitizen ballots case a week before a judge was set to examine the list behind it. The ballots will be counted; the list’s accuracy will not be tested in that courtroom.
The Justice Department on Nov. 6 dropped its lawsuit over California noncitizen ballots, abandoning its effort to make the state set aside mail ballots from about 20,000 people the department believes are likely not U.S. citizens. The notice of voluntary dismissal, filed in United States v. California, No. 2:26-cv-12025, before U.S. District Judge David O. Carter of the Central District of California, ends the civil fight over California’s count. It does not end the federal scrutiny of the people on the list, and it means a hearing that would have tested the list’s reliability will not take place in this case.
The filing is short and candid about why. Carter had denied emergency relief and set a preliminary injunction hearing for Nov. 13, which the department called “more than a week after Election Day.” By then, it said, California “will have already commingled the challenged ballots with lawful ones,” so the relief it wanted “is no longer available” and there is “no longer Article III jurisdiction.” The department added that it “is evaluating how to best ensure that American votes are protected.”
The courts kept returning to the same problem: once a mail ballot leaves its envelope, it cannot be traced back to a voter. The government lost four times in eight days: the Ninth Circuit dismissed its first emergency appeal on Oct. 26, Carter denied a temporary restraining order on Oct. 28, a Ninth Circuit panel refused an injunction pending appeal on Oct. 30, and the Supreme Court denied the department’s emergency application on Nov. 2.
The scale explains why judges were reluctant to intervene. About 9 million California ballots had been processed as of early Friday, with roughly 5 million left to count, according to the Associated Press, as published by CBS News. Even if every one of the 20,000 names had produced a ballot, that would be about 0.14 percent of the roughly 14 million total, a calculation based on those AP figures.
The list that never got its hearing
The more lasting consequence concerns the list itself. Carter had appointed a special master in late October, AP reported, and the Nov. 13 hearing was expected to address how accurate the department’s names were. A Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) notice, which the department used because California had not yet filed an answer, ends a case without a court order and, unless the notice says otherwise, without prejudice. This notice does not say otherwise. In practical terms, the department keeps the option of bringing a similar claim later, and no federal judge in California has ruled on whether the list is reliable.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta framed the withdrawal as a retreat from that scrutiny. “Rather than face that scrutiny, it chose to drop its case,” he said in a statement, adding that “California stood firm and prevailed.” His office noted that courts in other cases have questioned the reliability of similar lists. State and county officials have said this one is outdated and includes legitimate voters, and the UCLA Voting Rights Project told a federal court that 42 percent of the names were not on California’s current voter file, as reported here earlier. The administration’s position, pressed throughout the case, is that the federal government has a sovereign interest in federal elections and that a ballot cast by a noncitizen cannot be undone once it is counted.
For green card holders whose names appear on the list, the dismissal changes little. Their exposure was never mainly about a single ballot. Federal prosecutors in Los Angeles had charged 34 lawful permanent residents as of Nov. 2, and the six charged that day were accused of lying on Form N-400, the citizenship application, about past voting rather than of illegal voting itself. Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, a noncitizen who votes in violation of law is both deportable and inadmissible, and unlawful voting can bar naturalization for lack of good moral character. None of that turns on what happened in Carter’s courtroom.
The California withdrawal also fits a broader pattern. A federal judge in Washington state barred a similar push to set ballots aside, and a separate Justice Department suit in Alaska was dismissed, with the administration appealing, AP reported. The department’s line about “evaluating” next steps leaves open whether it shifts to voter-roll suits, prosecutions or rulemaking before the next federal election.
Still unresolved:
- The Ninth Circuit appeal: the dismissal notice covers the district court case; whether the department also formally drops its pending appeal had not been reported.
- The prosecutions: felony charges filed by criminal complaint need a grand jury indictment to go forward, and each defendant is presumed innocent.
- The Alaska appeal: the administration is challenging the dismissal of its Alaska suit, AP reported.
This article is for general information and is not legal advice.
Sources: The United States’ Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, United States v. California, No. 2:26-cv-12025 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 6, 2026); California Attorney General, press release (Nov. 6, 2026); CBS News and Associated Press, “DOJ moves to drop its lawsuit asking California to set aside alleged noncitizen ballots” (Nov. 6, 2026); Supreme Court order, No. 26A624 (Nov. 2, 2026); U.S. Attorney’s Office, Central District of California (Nov. 2, 2026); 8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(6); Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41.
About the Author
