CHIRLA and UCLA Voting Rights Project Secure Preliminary Injunction Blocking Federal Demands to Set Aside California Ballots
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Alberto Lammers; alberto@uclavrp.org
WIN: CHIRLA and UCLA Voting Rights Project Secure Preliminary Injunction Blocking Federal Demands to Set Aside California Ballots
In CHIRLA v. DHS, court finds federal demands likely unconstitutional and recognizes threats to eligible citizens’ voting rights.
WASHINGTON (November 2, 2026) — A federal judge today granted a preliminary injunction blocking the federal government from demanding that California election officials segregate ballots or depart from existing state election procedures based on lists of suspected noncitizens. The ruling comes in a lawsuit brought by the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA) and California voter Pedro Trujillo, represented by attorneys from CHIRLA and the UCLA Voting Rights Project (VRP), including VRP Senior Advisor and Voting Rights Counsel Xavier Becerra.
Chief Judge James E. Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia found that the federal government’s demands likely violate the Constitution’s Elections Clause because the Executive Branch lacks authority to unilaterally impose its preferred procedures for verifying citizenship and counting ballots. He also found that CHIRLA had identified citizen members wrongly included on the government’s lists and that election officials’ ongoing review of those lists created a concrete risk to their ability to vote.
“Defendants’ flawed lists risk chilling or preventing lawful votes from being cast and counted … The disruptive effects of Defendants’ demands, moreover, threaten to extend beyond however many California voters are wrongfully included on the lists. They also threaten to modify the “operation of voter identification procedures” with voting already underway, causing “voter confusion and consequent incentive to remain away from the polls.” Boasberg wrote in his opinion.
“Eligible citizens should not have to fear that their ballots will be set aside because their government wrongly labeled them noncitizens,” said VRP Legal Director Chad Dunn. “Today’s order protects voters from federal demands to change California’s election rules while voting is already underway. We are grateful that the court recognized the harm to CHIRLA and its members. Eligible California voters should go out and vote with confidence, knowing the court has put protections in place against these unlawful demands.”
“The court has seen the evidence and found that both our organization and our members are being harmed by this unconstitutional attack on the right to vote. With Election Day tomorrow, this will give the needed breathing room to our citizen members and all other Californians who wish to vote, our volunteers and staff who engage in electoral work as well as to California officials who work so tirelessly to administer elections and protect the franchise,” said Angelica Salas, Executive Director, of CHIRLA.
Background
The ruling follows an October 30 order requiring the government to provide the disputed list to plaintiffs’ legal team. An analysis by UCLA researchers Matt Barreto and Michael Rios identified at least 22 full matches and 66 additional near-certain matches between the government’s list and CHIRLA’s citizen member and client records. In its opinion, the court described Barreto as “well qualified and credible” and relied on the matching evidence in finding that CHIRLA had established standing to seek relief.
The court also recognized harm to CHIRLA’s work, finding that the organization had redirected limited resources to address voters’ fears and help members protect their voting rights. It concluded that CHIRLA’s members need not wait until their ballots are segregated to seek protection.
The lawsuit, filed September 2, challenges federal actions that plaintiffs argue wrongly target naturalized citizens and interfere with California’s elections. Plaintiffs sought emergency relief after DOJ demanded that election officials withhold or segregate ballots associated with its lists and threatened legal consequences for noncompliance.
The court granted the emergency motion in part, issuing a targeted preliminary injunction against those demands rather than the broader relief requested. The underlying lawsuit continues. DOJ’s separate motion to strike portions of the expert report and seek sanctions remains pending; today’s opinion did not resolve it.
###
ABOUT the UCLA Voting Rights Project
The UCLA Voting Rights Project was established to protect equal voting rights for all Americans through strategic litigation, social science research and policy advocacy. The VRP seeks to ensure that all individuals are afforded equal access to the electoral process and representation in governance. For more information about the UCLA Voting Rights Project, please visit vrp.ucla.edu.
