Trump administration drops lawsuit over California election procedures

The Justice Department filed a notice of dismissal after it failed to persuade three courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, to make California verify ballots were cast by U.S. citizens.LOS ANGELES (CN) — The Trump administration on Friday dropped its lawsuit to force California election officials to sequester ballots from as many as 20,000 voters on a Homeland Security list of purported noncitizens.The Justice Department filed a notice of voluntary dismissal in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles after repeatedly failing to get an unprecedented injunction to interfere in how states handle their election procedures.“In an effort to protect American voters and to prevent the irreparable harm of state and local election officials including illegally cast votes in the final vote tabulation, the United States exhausted its appeals to obtain timely relief all the way to Supreme Court,” the Justice Department said.“In light of the Supreme Court’s denial, the United States is evaluating how to best ensure that American votes are protected, including by preventing vote dilution by noncitizens,” the government added.The voluntary dismissal avoids a hearing scheduled next Friday before U.S. District Judge David Carter on the administration’s bid for a preliminary injunction.The judge, a Bill Clinton appointee, appointed a special master to help him, before this hearing, get to the bottom of how Homeland Security assembled the disputed list of noncitizens on California voter rolls.Carter didn’t pull his punches last week when he rejected the Justice Department’s request for a temporary restraining order — a short term legal remedy — to disrupt the counting of mail-in ballots just days before Election Day.“Never before in American history has the federal government, on the eve of an election, sought to coerce a state and local government to abandon their own Constitutional elections procedures and bend to the will of the executive branch,” Carter said. “In bringing this lawsuit, the executive would have this court believe that it reigns as a sole sovereign. But California and its people are sovereign, too.”The government’s request, the judge added, violates longstanding constitutional principles mandating states have control over their elections. If this last-minute request were granted, either party could create chaos for their own political purposes to disrupt the election process, he said.In addition, Carter questioned the credibility of the list of purported noncitizens on California’s voter rolls that Homeland Security compiled, noting a similar list of ineligible voters in Nevada that started with about 16,000 names whittled down to just 185 registered voters who all turned out to be citizens.Days after Carter’s ruling, the Ninth Circuit in a split decision siding with him.“We decline the United States’ invitation to contravene the elections clause by undermining the Constitution’s plain text,” the panel wrote then in a per curiam opinion. “If the United States believes different procedures are necessary for vote-by-mail ballots, we believe it should take that suggestion to Congress, not the courts.”While U.S. Circuit Judge Mark Bennett, a Donald Trump appointee, and U.S. Circuit Judge Gabriel Sanchez, a Joe Biden appointee, denied the government’s appeal, U.S. Circuit Judge Bumatay, also a Trump appointee, dissented, as he had done in the previous ruling.“Throughout history, federal courts have acted to protect the voting and civil rights of our citizens by enjoining state action that violates the law,” Bumatay wrote. “And common sense also tells us that the federal government shouldn’t have to sit on its hands while a state allows the violation of federal law, especially when the integrity of federal elections is at stake.”The U.S. Supreme Court summarily rejected the Trump’s administration emergency request to interfere in California’s election without even requiring a response from the state. The justices did not explain their decision and there were no noted dissents.In a statement, Jill Habig, founder and CEO of the Public Rights Project, called the dismissal a victory for all local elections officials.“The federal government never should have brought this lawsuit. Now, having lost at every level, they finally recognized there was no more case left to pursue,” she said.Also on Friday, the Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO and other groups dropped their lawsuit against the Justice Department over letters sent to California election officials that threatened them with criminal prosecution if workers process the ballots of people on a list of suspected noncitizens.U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson had blocked the department last week from threatening, intimidating or coercing local election officials nationwide from processing ballots of registered voters the government suspects belong to noncitizens. The temporary restraining order expires at 5 p.m. next Friday.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads