Courts Toss Trump Lawsuits on Alaska and California Elections
Left 33%
Center 67%
Right 0%
1 left · 2 center · 0 right
What happened
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday evening denied a last-minute Department of Justice request to temporarily block California from counting mail-in ballots from about 20,000 voters the DOJ said appeared likely not to be U.S. citizens. The unsigned one-sentence order had no noted dissents and came after Justice Elena Kagan referred the application to the full court, following a Friday 2-1 Ninth Circuit decision that upheld U.S. District Judge David Carter’s Wednesday denial of the DOJ’s Oct. 15 lawsuit filed in Los Angeles. Separately, a federal judge on Sunday dismissed a DOJ lawsuit that sought to prevent Alaska officials from immediately certifying the U.S. Senate election if incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan lost by a margin that could be attributed to voter confusion about another candidate with the same name; the DOJ said it would appeal. In another California case, U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson barred the DOJ from threatening election workers with criminal prosecution after a department lawyer acknowledged that lists of purported noncitizens had a high error rate.
Sourcing check · Mostly on the record · 3 articles
1 of 2 articles cite a named source for the story. It started with unnamed sources; a named source appeared within the hour.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 1 of 2
- On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Supreme Court
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 1 of 2
- Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: court order
- Credits another outlet 0 of 2
- The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
- Unnamed sources 0 of 2
- The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
- How it developed
- When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Nov 2, 23:43 UTC by CBS News, with no named source. First named source within the hour, from CNBC. First document within the hour, from CNBC (court order).
- Not counted 1
- Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
ONE-SIDED THIS WEEK.
Only left-leaning outlets have covered this story in the last two days;
Washington Examiner reported it on 2026-10-29.
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
Left-leaning coverage reports that the Supreme Court denied the Justice Department's last-minute request to stop California from counting mail ballots from about 20,000 voters the department said were likely not citizens. The order carried no noted dissents, and the court did not ask California to respond, CNBC says. A 9th Circuit majority that included a Trump-appointed judge had already refused the same request. A DOJ lawyer admitted the noncitizen lists had a "high error rate." Left-leaning coverage also notes that a federal judge dismissed a related Alaska suit seeking to delay Senate certification, which the department is appealing. Right-leaning outlets had not covered this as of publication, so readers there would not learn of the stacked denials or the error-rate admission. The left account does not say how many people on the list actually returned ballots.
Did anyone named on the Homeland Security list cast a vote that was counted?
Bottom line
The courts' rejection of the DOJ's California and Alaska election suits, including a no-dissent Supreme Court order, is being told by CNBC and not by right-leaning outlets.
The receipts — 1 fact one side's coverage lacks
- The district court concluded that the United States lacks Article III standing to bring the California suit.
The Left View
CNBC provided the fullest account, framing the Supreme Court denial as another courtroom setback for the Trump administration on the eve of midterm elections in which pollsters widely predict Democratic gains. It reported Solicitor General D. John Sauer’s claim that more than 20,000 California registrants were likely not citizens, Judge Carter’s statements that the case concerned every citizen’s right to vote and that the federal government had never before sought to coerce a state to abandon its election procedures on the eve of an election, and the Ninth Circuit majority’s warning of a material risk of disenfranchisement, noting that Trump-appointed Judge Mark Bennett joined Biden-appointed Judge Gabriel Sanchez. CNBC also reported a DOJ lawyer’s admission of a high error rate on the noncitizen lists and a separate order stopping DOJ threats against election workers. CBS News reported that a judge tossed the Alaska lawsuit seeking to delay Senate certification and that the DOJ vowed to appeal.
Our Take (balanced)
The story is substantive: it rests on named judges, dated court orders, and quoted filings rather than one party’s uncorroborated word. It is established that the Supreme Court denied the California emergency stay, the Ninth Circuit and Judge Carter rejected the DOJ’s request to sequester the disputed ballots, a federal judge dismissed the Alaska certification suit, and a DOJ lawyer acknowledged a high error rate on the voter lists. The DOJ’s assertion that more than 20,000 California voters are likely noncitizens remains alleged and was not accepted by the courts that ruled. No right-leaning outlet has reported this. Watch next for the DOJ’s Alaska appeal, any additional court papers, and statements from California and Alaska election officials as counting proceeds.
3 sources
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.