THE APEX TIMES
A federal judge declined an administration request to block ballot counting tied to claims that thousands of noncitizens are registered in California, as the Trump administration opened a criminal investigation and began issuing subpoenas to election officials.
The Trump administration has opened a criminal investigation in California over claims that noncitizens are registered to vote in the state, and has started subpoenaing election officials, according to reporting by Bloomberg Law and The New York Times and summarized by The Guardian.
The development comes shortly before election-related deadlines in California. The reporting says the investigation was initiated after the administration alleged that as many as 20,000 people who are not U.S. citizens were registered to vote, prompting federal enforcement scrutiny and a request for court action to restrict the state’s election processing.
In a separate proceeding, a federal judge declined to order California to stop counting ballots connected to the administration’s allegations, according to The Guardian’s account of the court dispute. The judge’s refusal means ballots from the groups at issue could continue to be processed while the investigation proceeds.
The administration’s criminal probe and subpoenas focus on election administration practices and the underlying eligibility records used to determine who appears on voter rolls. The reporting describes the subpoenas as part of efforts to obtain information from election officials about voter registration status and related records.
Opposition to the administration’s effort, as reflected in court filings discussed by news outlets, centered on whether the requested relief was appropriate and whether it could disrupt the election administration process. The judge’s decision, as described by The Guardian, kept state ballot counting in motion rather than halting it through a court order.
The next steps will depend on the progress of the investigation, the scope of information requested in the subpoenas, and the outcomes of any additional litigation over the administration’s authority and the proper timing and targets of enforcement actions tied to election administration.
Because the reporting is based on accounts of the investigation and the court ruling, additional details about the specific agencies involved, the legal basis for the subpoenas, and the identities of the targets named in the court materials would need to be confirmed from primary court documents or official filings.
