During a hearing Tuesday, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter questioned the timing and potential consequences of the Justice Department’s emergency request, which comes just one week before California’s election.
The judge indicated that he intends to appoint an independent special master to examine how federal officials compiled the list of approximately 20,000 individuals suspected of being ineligible to vote.
The move represents a potential setback for the Trump administration’s efforts to secure immediate judicial intervention in the state’s election procedures.
The Justice Department is seeking a temporary restraining order that would require California election officials to segregate ballots associated with individuals identified by federal authorities as likely noncitizens.
However, Judge Carter appeared unconvinced that such a significant intervention was justified so close to Election Day.
He described the requested action as a “monumental change” to California’s ongoing election administration, raising concerns about the disruption it could cause.
Although Carter did not issue a final decision on the emergency request during Tuesday’s hearing, he said he expected to release a ruling addressing the next steps in the case by Wednesday.
His proposal to appoint a special master would introduce independent scrutiny of the Justice Department’s methodology for identifying the individuals on its list.
The judge’s comments suggested that the court wants additional information about the reliability of the federal government’s allegations before determining whether extraordinary election-related measures are warranted.
Bill Essayli, the Trump-appointed leader of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, defended the administration’s legal action during the hearing.
Essayli argued that the Justice Department was seeking to ensure California’s compliance with federal laws prohibiting noncitizens from voting in federal elections.
The administration maintains that the individuals identified in its list may be ineligible to cast ballots and that additional safeguards are necessary to protect election integrity.
Federal prosecutors are asking the court to require the state to handle the ballots separately while the eligibility concerns are addressed.
However, the Justice Department’s allegations regarding the approximately 20,000 individuals have not been established by the court.
California officials and legal advocates opposing the lawsuit argued that the federal government’s demands threaten longstanding constitutional principles governing the administration of elections.
They maintained that states have primary responsibility for overseeing their electoral processes and that federal intervention at such a late stage could create significant administrative challenges.
Opponents also warned that requiring election officials to segregate thousands of ballots could complicate vote counting and delay the certification process.
They argued that implementing new procedures shortly before Election Day could create confusion for election administrators and uncertainty over the treatment of affected ballots.
The dispute highlights competing concerns over federal election law enforcement and state authority to manage elections.
The case comes at a sensitive moment, with California election officials preparing for voting and the subsequent counting of ballots.
Judge Carter’s decision could determine whether the Justice Department is permitted to pursue immediate restrictions on how the state handles ballots associated with the disputed list.
His proposed appointment of a special master could also place the federal government’s evidence and identification procedures under closer examination.
For now, the court has not granted the Justice Department’s request for a temporary restraining order.
A ruling on the next steps is expected Wednesday, as the legal battle continues just days before voters head to the polls.
The outcome could have implications for the balance between federal oversight of election laws and the authority of states to administer their own elections.
