
NewsSanta Monica Daily PressNovember 2, 2026Los Angeles County
Appeals Court Rejects Request to Set Aside California Ballots as Los Angeles County Prepares for Election Day
Photo: Santa Monica Daily Press
A federal appeals court has denied the Justice Department's request to force California to set aside thousands of disputed ballots, allowing local election counts to proceed. Los Angeles County officials maintain that their voting systems are secure, while federal prosecutors investigate noncitizen voting claims and issue subpoenas to county staff.
Read the full story at Santa Monica Daily PressWhy It Matters
The federal litigation directly impacts how Los Angeles County processes and counts votes, raising questions for voters about ballot security and deadlines as 646 vote centers and 429 drop boxes operate across the county.
Key Facts
- A federal appeals court in a 2-1 ruling rejected the Justice Department's bid to force California to set aside thousands of disputed ballots.
- The Trump administration alleges California sent ballots to roughly 20,000 potentially ineligible noncitizens and wants those ballots held uncounted.
- State officials contend the list of 20,000 names is unreliable and that processed ballots cannot be matched back to individual voters.
- At least three Los Angeles County election officials have been subpoenaed and asked to appear before a grand jury Wednesday.
- Federal prosecutor Bill Essayli warned that election officials who knowingly process a noncitizen's ballot face legal jeopardy.
- A federal judge ordered the government to share the list of 20,000 names with lawyers for the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights and the UCLA Voting Rights Project.
- A separate 9th Circuit panel ordered federal investigations into alleged past noncitizen voting to remain on hold in nine states until after Election Day.
- Unions including the AFL-CIO asked a federal judge to bar the Justice Department from demanding that local officials stop counting ballots.
- Los Angeles County features 646 vote centers open for voting and conditional registration, alongside 429 official drop boxes.
- Every vote-by-mail ballot undergoes signature verification, and voters are notified if signatures are missing or do not match.
Who's Mentioned
PersonDonald Trump“President who appointed judges Mark J. Bennett and Patrick J. Bumatay”PersonKathryn Barger“Supervisor representing the 5th District”OrganizationAFL-CIO“Union coalition asking a federal judge to bar the department from stopping ballo”Organization9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals“Federal appeals court ruling on the ballot segregation request”locationLos Angeles County“County facing federal lawsuits and managing local voting operations”PersonJoe Biden“Former President who appointed judge Gabriel P. Sanchez”PersonPatrick J. Bumatay“Dissenting judge on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel”PersonGabriel P. Sanchez“Judge on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel”OrganizationAmerican Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees“Union coalition joining the legal filing”PersonDean Logan“Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk”OrganizationUCLA Voting Rights Project“Project examining the effect of the disputed voter list on eligible voters”PersonXavier Becerra“Democratic candidate for governor and adviser to the UCLA project”OrganizationThe Associated Press“News organization reporting on the court ruling and obtaining documents”PersonKiersten V. Pels“Department spokesperson”OrganizationU.S. Postal Service“Postal agency experiencing changes affecting ballot postmarks”PersonBill Essayli“Top federal prosecutor in Los Angeles”OrganizationCoalition for Humane Immigrant Rights“Group requesting access to the list of disputed names”PersonMark J. Bennett“Judge on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel”OrganizationJustice Department“Federal agency bringing lawsuits and subpoenas regarding election ballots”PersonJanice Hahn“Supervisor representing the 4th District”locationCalifornia“State targeted by the Justice Department's ballot requests”OrganizationSupreme Court“Potential higher court for the legal dispute”
