US District Judge Whitehead: Bars DOJ Washington Ballot Demands

• A federal judge temporarily barred the Justice Department from demanding Washington state set aside approximately 400 voter ballots.
• US District Judge Jamal Whitehead ruled that federal agencies can request, but not compel, states to hold ballots.
• The Justice Department had sent a list of voters to Washington election officials, giving them 24 hours to review and threatening officials who counted the ballots.
• Washington's Secretary of State refused the demand, and a state review found the list unreliable, including U.S. citizens.
• The order prohibits the Justice Department and other federal officials from demanding voter removals, ballot refusals, or threatening state election officials.

The court emphasized that while federal agencies may ask a state to set ballots aside, they lack the authority to compel such action.

A federal judge in Seattle has issued a temporary injunction, preventing the Justice Department from compelling Washington state election officials to set aside approximately 400 voter ballots. The ruling, handed down by US District Judge Jamal Whitehead, a Joe Biden appointee, found that federal prosecutors had demanded, rather than merely requested, that the state take action on a list of voters and had threatened officials who proceeded to count those ballots.

This judicial intervention came after Acting U.S. Attorney Pete Serrano of the Eastern District of Washington and First Assistant U.S. Attorney Neil Floyd of the Western District sent a list of voters to Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs on October 26, just eight days before Election Day. At this point, mail ballots were already being returned to county offices. The federal officials gave Hobbs a mere 24 hours to review the list and instructed county election officials to delay signature verification and ballot counting for these individuals until their citizenship status could be definitively determined. Concurrently, Floyd publicly warned that anyone assisting in illegal voting would be guilty of a crime under aiding and abetting theories.

Secretary Hobbs rejected the federal directive two days later. A subsequent review conducted by Washington state authorities revealed significant inaccuracies in the federal list, identifying it as unreliable. Specifically, at least 62 individuals on the list had not even been sent a ballot because their registrations were either canceled, inactive, or could not be located. Furthermore, the state's assessment confirmed that the list included United States citizens who had already provided proof of their citizenship to the state. The temporary injunction was partially granted in response to a lawsuit filed by OneAmerica Votes, the Latino Community Fund of Washington State, and the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, whose membership includes naturalized citizens.

Judge Whitehead’s ruling underscored a critical distinction between federal agencies requesting information or action from states and compelling them to comply. The court emphasized that while federal agencies may ask a state to set ballots aside, they lack the authority to compel such action. In this specific instance, Judge Whitehead concluded, "On this record, defendants did not ask," indicating that the Justice Department's communication constituted a demand rather than a mere inquiry or request.

The federal government had argued that its communication was simply a request that Washington was free to decline, citing a recent Ninth Circuit ruling that had temporarily halted a nationwide order against similar demands. However, Judge Whitehead dismissed this argument, pointing to the Justice Department’s own statements and subsequent actions. He noted that federal officials, including Serrano on a radio broadcast the day after the initial letter, had indicated an intent to escalate pressure by potentially sending similar letters to all 39 county auditors, with the explicit goal of preventing these ballots from being counted. The judge found the government's assertion that it had taken no further action since the initial letter to be inconsistent with its public statements.

This decision aligns with a recent Ninth Circuit ruling in a separate California case, which clarified that laws criminalizing noncitizen voting in federal elections do not empower the Justice Department to "take charge of or intervene in a state’s administration of an ongoing election." The Supreme Court subsequently declined to disturb that Ninth Circuit decision, reinforcing the principle of state autonomy in election management.

The federal judge bars DOJ Washington ballot demands, establishing a significant precedent regarding the limits of federal authority over state election administration. This US District Judge Jamal Whitehead ruling safeguards the integrity of Washington state election administration and protects the voting rights of eligible citizens, particularly naturalized citizens who were disproportionately affected by the Justice Department voter ballot demands. Judge Whitehead specifically noted that members of the plaintiff union faced a tangible risk of being deterred from voting or having their ballots improperly set aside, emphasizing that "Voters who followed the rules should not lose their votes to a list that even its authors admit may include citizens."

The temporary order broadly prohibits the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and four named officials—Attorney General Todd Blanche, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, Pete Serrano, and Neil Floyd—from demanding that any Washington election official remove specific voters from rolls, refuse them ballots, or leave their ballots uncounted. Crucially, it also forbids these federal entities and individuals from threatening state election officials with criminal prosecution or investigation for refusing to comply with such demands. This ruling, stemming from the OneAmerica Votes lawsuit, reinforces the principle that federal agencies cannot unilaterally dictate state election processes, especially concerning voter eligibility challenges related to noncitizen voting federal elections.

This ruling clarifies the limits of federal intervention in state election administration, establishing that federal agencies may request but not demand states set aside ballots. Lawyers advising state election officials or advocacy groups should note this precedent when federal agencies attempt to influence state election processes, particularly concerning voter eligibility challenges, reinforcing state autonomy in election management.

Source: Original reporting via Associated Press and Courthouse News Service.