Is Counting Illegal Ballots Illegal or Not? Ninth Circuit Just Changed Its Mind Again.

Now, I don't want to alarm you too much, but the Ninth Circuit had a hard time deciding if it was legal for the feds to demand that California and Washington State not count illegal votes. By the time the struggle was over, many heads on that court were hurting from their internal struggle between their Trump Derangement Syndrome and not wanting to look like a dummy and follow common sense and the law. 

The law has won. So far. But hey, things could change.

I know, it seems as if this should be an easy call. Not a jump ball. Not a coin flip. Here we were, within hours of an election, and the kids just couldn't figure out if it would be OK under the law to allow the president of the United States to ask California, pretty please, to set aside the illegal votes of people who were ineligible voters. 

These are the universe of 20,000 voters and apparently others in Washington State that the Department of Justice identified as illegal voters who had voted multiple times, in most, if not all, of the cases, illegally coming to America. The DOJ asked if the states would sequester these suspect ballots until they could verify if the votes were cast by legal voters. 

States sequester ballots all the time for signatures, curing, provisional ballots. They know how to do it and have been playing dumb for a while now — especially in court.

On Election Day afternoon, during an en banc hearing of eleven of the Ninth Circuit judges from all over the West Coast, Messed Coast™ and other states, judges decided that it would allow the Trump administration to ask states to set aside suspected ineligible ballots

BREAKING: In a 6-5 vote, the Ninth Circuit reinstated its earlier ruling lifting restrictions on the Trump administration's efforts to have states set aside suspected noncitizen ballots, allowing it to resume such requests and warn election officials of prosecution. https://t.co/w6UFfDfHlP

— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) November 3, 2026

It was the third time in 12 hours that the court changed its mind. 

SCOTUS Wire provides the play-by-play. Grab your score book because there's no easy Tinkers to Evers to Chance in this game. 

In this case, a three-judge panel first lifted the restrictions imposed on the Trump administration by a district judge. Then, the full Ninth Circuit voted to rehear the case en banc, which automatically wiped out the three-judge panel's ruling. The 11-judge panel has now voted to restore the 3-judge panel's ruling, which has the effect of pausing the restrictions placed on the Trump administration in the lower court. Those restrictions will remain paused pending the full appeal process playing out.

Did you get that?

The upshot is that the Trump administration can pursue enforcement of the law as it understands it. Indeed, instead of all the unions suing to treat the request by the Trump administration as "unlawfully intimidating, threatening, or coercive," the judges ruled that the executive branch gets to call the ball here, according to the decision.

U.S. Attorney-in-Waiting Bill Essayli wrote on X on Election Night that "the rule of law prevails. Separation of powers does not allow judges to take control of core executive branch powers."

He said, "we will conduct our criminal investigations without fear or favor." 

The rule of law prevails. Separation of powers does not allow judges to take control of core executive branch powers. We will conduct our criminal investigations without fear or favor.

— F.A. United States Attorney Bill Essayli (@USAttyEssayli) November 3, 2026

California's illegal voters are similar to these two who were arrested in the last few days, according to the Justice Department:

Filipino national Sirgalahad Camua, 43, a lawful permanent resident, has been charged with making false statements on his naturalization applications. Camua allegedly illegally registered to vote in August 2009 by falsely claiming to be a U.S. citizen. In May 2025, Camua filed paperwork seeking to become a naturalized U.S. citizen and, under penalty of perjury, falsely stated that he had neither claimed to be a U.S. citizen nor had he registered to vote in U.S. elections.

Israeli national Moria Dahan, 35, a lawful permanent resident, has been charged with making false statements on her naturalization applications. Dahan allegedly illegally registered to vote and voted in person on Nov. 5, 2024, the date of the U.S. general election. She falsely claimed under penalty of perjury to be a U.S. citizen. On her naturalization form dated November 6, 2025, she falsely stated under penalty of perjury that she never claimed to be a U.S. citizen nor had she registered to vote in a U.S. election.

Yeah, you can't do that. But the Ninth District judges were a bit confused as to whether a president can ask the state to set aside the votes of people like these who have voted multiple times in American elections. 

For the record, a bunch of unions, led by SEIU, were the plaintiffs suing the Justice Department for wanting to sequester the illegal votes. Indeed, they sued to stop the feds from asking for more votes to be sequestered because that would ruin all their fun. 

At the end of the 37-page decision, the judges ruled that the Executive Branch had the right to ask that suspected illegal voters' ballots be set aside. 

Stay tuned, and make sure you've got your score sheet with you. 

Editor's Note: Do you enjoy PJ Media's conservative reporting exposing the radical left and woke media? Support our work so we can keep bringing you the truth.

Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.