Sacramento — County election officials across California are disputing recent letters from the U.S. Department of Justice that asked counties to set aside ballots tied to people the department identified as likely noncitizens — a demand that arrived just days before the midterm elections.
Counties report incomplete lists, tight deadline
The letters, delivered Friday afternoon, gave local election offices what officials described as a 48-hour window to respond. Several county clerks said the lists contained inaccurate or outdated registrations, and in many cases did not match local records.
Tricia Webber, president of the California Association for Clerks and Election Officials and the Santa Cruz County clerk, said the DOJ provided a list of 81 names for her county. Webber told reporters that more than half of those names were no longer registered in Santa Cruz County, at least one name had no record of ever being registered there and some entries did not exactly match county files.
"I have names that are similar but not exact from what they provided. Are they the same people or are they not? It's incomplete data that they're giving us, and we have no idea where their data came from in order to create these lists," said Tricia Webber.
Other counties raise similar concerns
Officials in Solano County said their list contained roughly 160 names. County staff sampled some of the entries and found that most of those voter registrations had already been canceled, including one cancellation dating back to 2006.
Election administrators and legal experts are questioning both the accuracy of the data and the legal authority behind the DOJ request. Kevin Johnson, a distinguished professor emeritus at UC Davis School of Law, said he was unaware of any statute that allows the Department of Justice to compel counties to set aside ballots.
"I'm not aware of any statute or command that the Department of Justice has the authority to require the setting aside of ballots," Johnson said.
Practical problems for local officials
County clerks said they face practical and legal dilemmas: determining whether the names on the lists actually match their voter rolls, deciding how to comply if the request is mandatory, and doing any of this work under a compressed time frame as election materials are processed.
Election offices typically follow strict chain-of-custody and recordkeeping procedures; segregating ballots based on an external list introduces additional complexity and potential for error. Several clerks stressed that accurate matching requires more than name comparisons and that supporting information about how the DOJ compiled the lists was not provided.
Political and legal stakes
With the midterm elections fewer than two weeks away, the matter raises concerns about both voter confidence and the potential for litigation. Some observers say federal and state authorities should coordinate closely on such matters so voters are not confused or disenfranchised.
Tamika Hamilton, a former congressional candidate, emphasized the need for collaboration between federal and state officials to protect the integrity of ballots.
"The DOJ and the State should be working hand in hand to make sure that the voters are not undermined by people who are potentially not supposed to be voting," Hamilton said.
Where things stand and what to watch
At this stage, county election officials are reviewing the lists and seeking clarification about the DOJ's expectations and legal basis. The tight timing and apparent data quality issues have prompted calls for more transparency from the federal agency about how the lists were generated.
Officials and legal experts say potential next steps include:
- Counties asking the DOJ for underlying data and methodology used to produce the lists.
- State election authorities coordinating guidance for counties on whether and how to act on the requests.
- Possible legal challenges if the DOJ attempts to enforce a directive absent clear statutory authority.
| County | Number of names received | Issues reported |
|---|---|---|
| Santa Cruz | 81 | Many no longer registered; mismatched names; at least one never registered |
| Solano | ~160 | Most sampled registrations canceled, including one from 2006 |
Election officials say they will continue checking the lists against local records and seek guidance from state election authorities and legal counsel. How county clerks respond in the coming days could shape both administration of the midterm elections and any follow-up legal battles.
Kevin Nakamura is the state correspondent for WE NEWS.
