Justice Department Subpoenas California Election Officials as Court Battle Over 20,000 Ballots Continues The U.S. Justice Department issued subpoenas to Los Angeles County election employees and asked the 9th Circuit to rule quickly on its bid to set aside up to 20,000 ballots, as a judge appointed a special master to review the claims. LOS ANGELES - The U.S. Justice Department has issued subpoenas to California officials, escalating its scrutiny of local election administration. The Associated Press obtained copies of three subpoenas sent Oct. 21 to employees of the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder, ordering them to appear in court on Nov. 4, the day after the election. Subpoenas Seek Records On Non Citizen AllegationsThe documents request any records, documents and communications related to letters sent in July and October by federal officials to state election officials outlining allegations of non-citizens on the state voter rolls. The subpoenas also seek information relating to the office methods for screening for unlawful voting by aliens and anything about efforts to prevent non-citizen votes from being counted.The subpoenas were being issued by all four U.S. attorneys in California, according to a person familiar with the matter who insisted on anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation. Dean Logan, the Los Angeles County registrar, said, threats and intimidated have no place in elections. The subpoenas come amid an ongoing court battle.The Trump administration has sued to force California to set aside up to 20,000 ballots it suspects went to non-citizens and not count them until citizenship can be verified. A district court judge on Tuesday rejected that request, then on Thursday appointed a special master to evaluate the administration claims.U.S. District Judge David O. Carter did not specify the exact scope of special master Daniel B. Garrie responsibilities, but said he would be tasked with developing the factual record for the court. In a Tuesday court hearing, Carter said he wanted to vet the federal government list of over 20,000 alleged non-citizen voters since there has been extensive debate over its reliability and both sides have agreed that it includes an unspecified number of citizens.Special Master Tasked With Evaluating Election ClaimsCarter also said at the hearing that a special master could investigate California claims that it cannot logistically separate the ballots in time for the county election certification deadline on Dec. 3. The federal government has contested that assertion. It is not clear what would happen if a special master did find a substantial number of non-citizen voters on the federal government list or whether it would affect the certification of California election results.The 20,000 people on the U.S. Department of Justice list constitute only a small fraction of California 23 million voters. Meanwhile, the Trump administration asked a federal appeals court to quickly weigh in. The U.S. Justice Department said in a late Wednesday filing that it is essential the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issue a ruling as soon as possible due to irreversible ballot processing occurring on an ongoing basis.Trump Administration Faces Legal Setback In CaliforniaCarter decision was the latest legal setback for U.S. President Donald Trump in his efforts to expand federal control over state-run elections in the midterms that will decide control of Congress for the rest of his term. The U.S. Justice Department has made similar demands in other states, including Washington. Non-citizen voting has been a central focus of Trump political messaging for years, although available data indicates it is exceedingly rare.Trump blasted Carter ruling against the federal government on Thursday morning before heading to a campaign rally in South Carolina. California is very corrupt. The elections are extremely corrupt. The judge should not have done that but we will appeal that, of course, he told reporters.Trump added without evidence that there are hundreds of thousands and then amended it to millions, in my opinion of bad ballots in California. Carter, an appointee of former Democratic U.S. president Bill Clinton, argued that the U.S. Justice Department demands were a clear violation of the National Voter Registration Act, which prohibits changes to voter rolls or election procedure within 90 days of an election.Both sides agree that an unspecified number of citizens were inadvertently included in the U.S. Justice Department list of names. Carter argued that separating the ballots at this point would risk disenfranchising citizens and wreak havoc on the election certification process. Over 500,000 votes have already been processed in Los Angeles County alone, according to court filings. The system also protects voter privacy: Once a vote is processed, it cannot be traced back to the person who cast it.Carter is to rule on the government renewed request for a preliminary injunction, which would bar the state from counting the ballots until the litigation is resolved. He said he will do so after a Nov. 13 evidentiary hearing with input from the special master. He said that if the federal government suspected non-citizens were voting, it could continue to prosecute those cases criminally.Appeals Court Reviews Federal Voting ChallengeFederal authorities have charged over two dozen foreign nationals in California as part of a statewide sweep targeting people officials allege have illegally registered or voted in U.S. elections. The appeal will be the second time that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will consider the case.The first time was just last week when the U.S. Justice Department argued before an appeals court panel that a fast ruling on its request was needed to stop any counting of the ballots. Although the panel ruled it was premature for an appeals court to get involved before a lower-court ruling, two of the three judges wrote separate concurrences making it clear they would not support setting aside ballots at this late date.They questioned the accuracy of the federal government list of alleged non-citizen voters and argued that to set aside votes risks disenfranchising citizens. One judge dissented, arguing that federal law bars non-citizens from voting.