WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court cleared the Trump administration to potentially resume pressuring state and local election officials to prevent voting by people it claims may be noncitizens as Americans go to the polls in the midterm elections.

In a 6-5 decision on Tuesday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a San Francisco judge’s ruling that had barred the Justice Department from demanding state and local election set aside disputed ballots, or threatening prosecution if they count them.

The latest appeals court ruling is a significant win for the administration, which has faced a number of legal setbacks in recent days. However, other court orders remain in place blocking U.S. officials from carrying out certain controversial election-related actions.

For example, a Monday order by a Washington, D.C., judge barred the administration from sending lists of potential noncitizens to state and local officials, a key element of its push to compel them to remove voters from rolls or segregate their ballots. Another judge on the D.C. federal bench prohibited U.S. officials from making ballot segregation demands in California.

The clash stems from contested claims by the Justice Department that Homeland Security investigators uncovered evidence that large numbers of registered voters may be noncitizens. U.S. officials urged California to set aside ballots cast by as many as than 20,000 people pending investigations and sent a similar demand regarding roughly 400 individuals in Washington state.

In letters to state and county officials, the department raised the prospect that election workers could be prosecuted for tabulating the votes of people flagged by the administration as ineligible. California and Washington state officials say the lists appear riddled with errors, and they accused the administration of trying sow doubt in the election results.

Acting in a lawsuit by labor and civil rights groups, U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson in San Francisco issued a temporary order Oct. 30 that said the Justice Department may not “threaten, intimidate or coerce” election officials to get them to stop processing disputed ballots.

That led to a blitz of activity before the 9th Circuit. A three-judge panel initially sided with the Justice Department in a 2-1 order on Monday evening, but within hours that was set aside after a larger panel of circuit judges voted to reconsider the dispute.

When the larger panel handed down its final decision Tuesday afternoon, however, the Trump administration prevailed, with six Republican-appointed judges in the majority. Although the appeals court as a whole didn’t explain its decision, two judges said in a concurring opinion that Thompson had overstepped.

“A district court does not generally have the authority to enter an injunction prohibiting the Department of Justice from expressing its views about criminal statutes, even if the court determines that those views are incorrect,” Judge Eric Miller wrote for himself and Judge Mark Bennett, both of whom were appointed by Trump.

Five dissenting judges, all Democratic appointees, said the decision couldn’t be squared with an Oct. 30 9th Circuit ruling that barred the Justice Department from forcing the state to set aside the 20,000 disputed ballots. The Supreme Court on Monday rejected the administration’s challenge to that ruling.

“If defendants cannot dictate these procedures directly, then they likewise cannot dictate them by subjecting vulnerable election workers to baseless — but chilling — threats of federal prosecution,” Chief Judge Mary Murguia wrote for the dissenters.

Ahead of Election Day, U.S. courts have ruled in a string of last-minute legal fights — some of which address similar legal claims — concerning moves by the administration to investigate allegations of noncitizen voting and compel state and local officials to act on information federal authorities say they’ve uncovered.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment. Bonta’s office represented the state in a Justice Department lawsuit seeking to set aside the ballots of alleged noncitizens and has been highly critical of the DOJ’s ongoing effort.

_____

©2026 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.