filing

Legal filing questions Trump’s claims of non-citizen voting in California | US Midterm Elections 2026 News

A new court filing has cast further doubt on the accuracy of a list of “likely non-citizen” voters that the administration of United States President Donald Trump sent to the state of California ahead of the midterm elections.

On Saturday, the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), an advocacy group, submitted an analysis to the court conducted by two data scientists from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA).

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

It found that more than four in every 10 names on the list were not on California’s voter rolls.

It also found that thousands of potentially eligible US citizens were incorrectly identified as ineligible to vote.

The Trump administration’s list, delivered to California in early October, had suggested that as many as 20,930 “likely non-citizens” were registered on the state’s voter rolls.

That list has formed the basis of a lawsuit, filed on October 15, that calls on California to sequester any ballots sent to those “likely non-citizens”, preventing them from being tallied as part of voting results.

The lawsuit is unfolding in the final days before Tuesday’s pivotal midterm elections, which will decide which party controls the US Congress, as well as key state and local offices.

Trump has expressed fear that, if his Republican Party loses its majorities in the two chambers of Congress, he could be impeached.

The Republican leader also has a track record of spreading false information about elections, including that his defeat in the 2020 presidential race was the result of a “rigged” vote.

He has often targeted California in his criticism. The state – the most populous in the country – is considered a longtime left-wing stronghold. It will elect 52 seats to the 435-member House of Representatives in Tuesday’s elections.

Already, Trump has accused California of “cheating” in its June 2 primary elections, after several Republican candidates underperformed, including Los Angeles mayoral hopeful Spencer Pratt.

Under the US Constitution’s Elections Clause, election administration falls solely to the states, though Congress may pass regulations governing voting.

Critics, including California’s Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom, have cited that fact in their rebuttal to Trump’s lawsuit.

All 50 states already prohibit non-citizen voting in federal elections and undertake measures to prevent voter fraud, which is considered exceedingly rare.

Other states that have received similar lists of “likely non-citizen” voters have also found significant errors in the Trump administration’s accounting. Nevada, for example, found that none of the names included on that list were non-citizen voters.

Such errors have raised concerns that eligible citizens would see their votes denied if the Trump administration wins its California lawsuit.

Still, the Trump administration has threatened state officials with prosecution over the potential for non-citizen voting.

It has also vigorously pursued its lawsuit through federal court. On Friday, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco rejected the complaint a second time, determining it unconstitutional.

“We decline the United States’s invitation to contravene the Elections Clause by undermining the Constitution’s plain text,” the court majority wrote in its ruling.

In Saturday’s court filing, the data scientists from UCLA’s Voting Rights Project found that 8,880 names on the list were not listed anywhere in California’s current voter files, a proportion of 42 percent.

Many other names on the list were either confirmed as US citizens or may correspond to US citizens.

“This review proves, at least as a preponderance of the evidence, that demands of election officials under criminal and civil threats, endangers the voting rights of plaintiff CHIRLA’s members and clients,” the filing said.

It was co-signed by the Democratic candidate to succeed Newsom as governor, Xavier Becerra.

Source link

BBC asks judge to force Trump to sit for deposition in his own lawsuit against the channel

Lawyers for the BBC say President Trump is trying to delay sitting for a deposition in the defamation case he brought against the British broadcaster until January 2027.

In a filing this week, they asked a Florida court to compel the president to appear in the $10 billion case after they say he canceled an agreed-upon date this week, citing “matters of national importance.”

“Two months of discovery remaining, the BBC still has not been able to depose, and does not even have a schedule to depose, the most central figure in this case: Plaintiff himself,” attorney Charles D. Tobin wrote in the filing. “Those delays have flouted the cooperative spirit of discovery and precluded the BBC from obtaining the evidence necessary to robustly litigate its defense.”

Trump, who has a history of avoiding depositions, filed the lawsuit against the BBC last December, seeking $10 billion in damages as he accused the British broadcaster of defamation as well as deceptive and unfair trade practices related to a documentary, “Trump: A Second Chance.”

Britain’s publicly funded national broadcaster admitted filmmakers spliced together quotes from different sections of the speech Trump delivered to his supporters on Jan. 6, 2021, before the storming of the U.S. Capitol, to make it seem like he was directly urging violence.

The 33-page lawsuit accused the BBC of broadcasting a “false, defamatory, deceptive, disparaging, inflammatory, and malicious depiction of President Trump,” calling it “a brazen attempt to interfere in and influence” the 2024 U.S. presidential election.

The broadcaster apologized to Trump over the edit and the head of the BBC and the British broadcaster’s top news executive both resigned. But the broadcaster has denied Trump’s claims that it defamed him.

In the filing this week, BBC lawyers said that they first requested dates for the deposition in July, and followed up repeatedly. Both sides, they said, eventually agreed on Oct. 16.

However, after weeks of silence, they wrote, “Plaintiff’s counsel responded on September 28, 2026, indicating that ‘the President is no longer available for his deposition on October 16 due to other matters of national importance’ and that counsel would ‘endeavor to provide you with a replacement date by the end of this week.’ He did not.”

Instead, they said, they were told last week that Trump “has no availability whatsoever for a deposition” before discovery is set to close on Dec. 18. and were told that Trump would instead make himself available the second or third week of January.

In a statement in response to the filing, a spokesperson for Trump’s legal team did not address the reasons for Trump’s delay, but repeated its allegations against the BBC and said the president was holding the broadcaster “accountable for its defamation and reckless election interference just as he has held other fake news mainstream media responsible for their wrongdoing.”

Trump voluntarily dropped a $500 million lawsuit he filed against his former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen in 2023, days before he was set to give a deposition in that suit.

Colvin writes for the Associated Press.

Source link