DOJ account does not substantiate ‘huge voter fraud ring’ headline shared by Trump

California reported 23,164,977 registered voters as of 4 September. The 28 defendants are not a tally of counted illegal votes, and allegations spanning several election years cannot establish a statewide fraud rate. The announcement provides no election-by-election total of unlawful votes counted. [6] [2]

The ballots behind the ultimatum

Acting Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter said all 28 defendants appeared on the list of more than 20,000 “likely noncitizen registrants” provided to California on 13 October. He accused California of having “refused to look at that list” and demanded citizenship checks before postal ballots were counted. [2]

The 13 October demand set a 15 October deadline for officials to implement a process setting aside affected postal ballots pending citizenship verification. The department then sued on 15 October, seeking an injunction preventing those ballots from being counted until verification. That was a request for a court order, not a ruling that the listed voters were ineligible. [3] [4]

The headline’s “days after” chronology is accurate. It does not establish that the ultimatum triggered the arrests; McCotter’s stated connection is that the defendants were on the federal list. [1] [2]

California Secretary of State Shirley Weber said she had been requesting the underlying data and methodology since July, when DHS first raised concerns about more than 190,000 registrants. She offered to review proof of ineligibility and take appropriate lawful action, but rejected withholding ballots solely because federal officials believed voters were “likely” noncitizens. She warned that the demand threatened eligible voters’ rights. [4]

Los Angeles County registrar Dean Logan said his office had formally responded on the morning of 15 October. He said the list covered people throughout California, not just his county, and that his office could not act outside its jurisdiction. [5]

The federal complaint, meanwhile, describes safeguards beyond simple name-matching. It says immigration officials check naturalisation records, consider citizenship acquired through parents, consult State Department records and conduct a second-level review. Those are the government’s stated procedures, rather than a measured error rate for the list. [3]

The pressure also extends to election workers. AP reported a further federal warning that officials risked investigation if they knowingly counted ballots from people federal agencies identified as noncitizens. [9]

A separate lawsuit filed in September, involving San Francisco, Santa Clara County and voting-rights groups, alleges that DHS investigations use flawed data and armed home visits to intimidate voters. The plaintiffs’ lawyers say the same data underlies the California list. A hearing on their request to halt the targeting was scheduled in Oakland for 19 October, according to a report by Sharon Bernstein republished by AOL. [8] [10]

Even if every individual allegation outlined in the arrest announcement is proved, those offences would not by themselves establish an organised fraud ring or confirm the ineligibility of the remaining people on the 20,000-plus list whose postal ballots the government wants set aside. [2] [3]