The leading federal prosecutor in Los Angeles has raised alarms about potential corruption in the upcoming midterm elections in California.
Bill Essayli expressed his worries regarding noncitizen votes being counted, particularly since mail-in ballot processing began on Saturday in preparation for the elections on November 3.
This assertion emerged following an unusual court hearing on Sunday, during which the Department of Justice clashed with California over a group of 20,000 voters identified by the federal government as noncitizens.
After the court session, Essayli stated, “Our concern is that noncitizens are actively voting in this election, and California has confirmed they will count their votes. This will corrupt the integrity of the upcoming midterm election.”
The DOJ is urging California to invalidate these votes, while state officials counter that the federal government should not interfere now that the election process is underway.
The panel of three judges in the case seemed to lean toward California’s position, uncertain of their authority to mandate a halt on counting the ballots, before adjourning without issuing a ruling by Sunday afternoon.
“It’s astonishing that California walked in and said these votes should be counted,” Essayli remarked. “They claimed it doesn’t matter whether they are noncitizens or not, which dilutes the votes of American citizens.”
He emphasized the determination to combat this issue, asserting that even one noncitizen vote is unacceptable and criticized California’s indifference toward counting votes from noncitizens.
This controversy follows significant voter fraud arrests last week in California, where 28 individuals were apprehended during early-morning raids statewide.
Additionally, the DOJ has sent letters to every county in California, urging local election officials to assist in identifying any noncitizen voters and giving them a tight deadline to comply. The department has also filed a lawsuit against California Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder Dean Logan on October 15.
This situation has reignited discussions around the need for voter identification in California elections. Prop 39 coauthor Carl DeMaio stated that voters have been misled about the current verification processes for citizenship before votes are counted, criticizing the state for failing in their responsibility.
He believes voters need to recognize that politicians are not adequately verifying citizenship and expressed the urgency for Prop 39 to ensure accountability at the ballot box.
California gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton added, “This exemplifies the issues plaguing California. Those in charge are failing to enforce the law.”
Essayli’s comments came soon after a heated exchange on social media with Governor Gavin Newsom, who dismissed the DOJ’s actions as a “desperate clown show.” In response, Essayli remarked, “Hey Fraud King. Noncitizens should not be on voter rolls. Period.”
The hearing took place in front of a three-judge federal appeals panel, two of whom were appointed by Trump, who interrogated the Justice Department regarding the request to set aside the 20,000 ballots.
Judge Mark Bennett, in an incredulous tone, questioned the feasibility of granting an injunction that goes against established law, asking, “How can we do that?”
Throughout the hearing, the judges noted that they might lack the authority to intervene, considering there’s a lower court hearing scheduled for Tuesday.
As of Sunday, no ruling had been made, but the panel indicated it would make a decision promptly. If they dismiss the appeal, the case will return to US District Judge David O. Carter on Tuesday.
“Once mail-in votes are processed, they can’t be unprocessed. The damage would be irreparable,” Donnelly stressed, citing that Los Angeles County had already processed over half a million ballots.
Judge Sanchez raised concerns about the reliability of the data used to compile the list of suspected noncitizens, particularly pointing out that ballot envelopes only show basic information like name and address.
He stated, “There are many people with the same name; how can you ensure accuracy?”
The judges expressed dissatisfaction with the situation, highlighting that California’s right to run elections, including managing noncitizen participation, is protected under the Elections Clause.
“But it seems to me that it’s Congress’s role to determine this,” Bennett remarked, pondering how a federal court could intervene in a matter that appears reserved for legislative action.
Judge Bumatay seemed to align more with the DOJ, pressing California about its capability to identify noncitizen voters.
Donnelly argued that without an injunction, the opportunity to address the noncitizen votes would be lost since they would be counted once cast.
California’s representative, Sam Siegel, disagreed with this notion, asserting there are thorough checks in place for voter registration to affirm citizenship, emphasizing that the Executive Branch must seek congressional authority to enforce such measures.
He warned that the DOJ’s request was an attempt to disrupt the electoral process while it was actively happening.
