DHS Vows to Prosecute Deport Noncitizens Voting Illegally
Left 50%
Center 0%
Right 50%
1 left · 0 center · 1 right
What happened
On Saturday, DHS General Counsel James Percival said on television that noncitizens who illegally vote “will [be] find[you], we will charge you, and we will deport you,” following a Wednesday DHS announcement that ICE had arrested dozens of noncitizens on related charges, some with records including assault with a dangerous weapon, domestic violence, drug trafficking, burglary and DUI. On Friday, U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg granted the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights access to a list of more than 20,000 people the administration alleges are noncitizen voters in California, ordering no name disclosure and use only for standing arguments; the group’s Saturday filing said more than 40 percent did not appear in the state voter file and identified 22 likely naturalized citizens plus thousands more apparent U.S. citizens. The Justice Department on Sunday asked Boasberg to consider contempt (including possible criminal referral), calling the analysis irrelevant to standing, while a UCLA Voting Rights Project spokesman said counsel “fully complied with the Court’s orders.” The department also appealed a Friday-night ruling by U.S. District Judge Trina L. Thompson barring demands that election offices remove possible noncitizens, separate ballots or threaten legal action, with a Monday hearing set. Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs challenged a Justice Department list of more than 400 alleged noncitizen registrants as including U.S. citizens, unreliable, and containing people not currently registered or on inactive status.
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 2 articles
2 of 2 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report. Alberto Lammers denied part of it on the record.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 2 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: Justice Department, James Percival, Markwayne Mullin and Department of Homeland Security
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 2 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 filing, court order, press release
- 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.
- On-record denial 1
- A named person or institution says the claim, or part of it, is not true. It is on the record — someone signed their name to it — but it is not confirmation, so it never counts toward On the record. Criticizing or dissenting from a decision is not a denial. The count is how many people or institutions deny it; each is listed with the first article that carried the denial. Here: Alberto Lammers (ABC News, Nov 1, 23:54 UTC)
- 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 1, 18:06 UTC by Fox News, naming its source. First document in the first report, from Fox News (press release).
- Not counted 0
- 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
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
Each side tells only half the crackdown, so the arrests and the list errors never appear together. Left-leaning coverage skips DHS arrests of noncitizens for illegal voting and the general counsel's vow to charge and deport them. Right-leaning coverage skips an immigrant-rights analysis of the Justice Department's California roster of alleged noncitizen voters, which found more than 40% of those names missing from the state voter file.
Left-leaning coverage leads with the Justice Department asking a judge to consider contempt against the group that published that analysis. Right-leaning coverage leads with a DHS lawyer's warning that illegal voters will be found, charged, and deported.
How many noncitizens actually cast ballots once citizens and unregistered names are taken off the federal lists?
Bottom line
Fox News reports that ICE arrested dozens of noncitizens for voting; ABC News never mentions those arrests and instead covers a contempt fight over a California list Fox does not describe.
The receipts — 1 fact one side's coverage lacks
- The Justice Department urged a federal judge to consider contempt charges, including possible criminal contempt, against CHIRLA and its lawyers for publishing their analysis
The Left View
Left-leaning coverage framed the Justice Department’s Sunday filing as an effort to sanction disclosure of list flaws, quoting its description of the analysis as “political grandstanding about alleged inaccuracies that purportedly impact California voters generally” with “no relevance” to standing. It noted the group’s compliance claim, the administration’s legal losses including Thompson’s pre-argument ruling and a California judge’s warning that last-minute ballot-separation orders could “wreak havoc,” and California officials’ contention that the list is riddled with errors, that legally required removals cannot be completed before the election, and that registrants already attest to citizenship under felony penalty.
The Right View
Right-leaning coverage centered on Percival’s warning and the Wednesday arrests, quoting Secretary Markwayne Mullin that “The patriots of ICE have arrested dozens of noncitizens who illegally voted in American elections,” some with criminal histories, and that “The Trump administration will not allow illegal aliens to steal the votes of hardworking American citizens. American elections are for Americans only.” It reported Percival’s statement that more than 200 people have been charged in connection with noncitizen voter fraud, while noting state pushback such as Hobbs’s finding that the Washington list included citizens and was “not reliable.”
Our Take (balanced)
The right’s strongest argument is that illegal noncitizen voting has occurred and is being prosecuted, supported by the DHS arrests of dozens (including people with records of assault with a dangerous weapon, drug trafficking and other offenses) and Percival’s citation of more than 200 charges. The left’s strongest argument is that the lists are inaccurate and last-minute enforcement risks disrupting elections, supported by the CHIRLA analysis of the California data, Hobbs’s review, and judicial language that such orders could “wreak havoc.” The central unresolved tension is whether the administration’s identifications reliably target illegal votes or rest on error-prone data that courts and some election officials have found could affect citizens or voting processes.
2 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.