A federal judge stopped the Department of Homeland Security from investigating suspected illegal voting. This order came just days before the midterm elections. The ruling affects key states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin made the decision on Wednesday. She was appointed by President Joe Biden in 2022. Her background includes six years at the ACLU.
She worked on immigrant rights cases before joining the bench. The judge cited concerns about voter intimidation. She said the public interest in safe elections is higher.
This outweighs the government’s interest in stopping noncitizen voting. The DHS argued that noncitizen voting is a crime. They claimed they had the legal authority to investigate.
The judge did not say investigating itself was illegal. Instead, she focused on the methods used by agents. DHS sent armed agents to homes for interviews.
The court viewed this as potentially intimidating. The order blocks field investigations in nine states. These include California, Georgia, and New York.
Several of these states have high-profile elections coming up. The judge delayed the order until Friday. This gave the Trump administration time to appeal.
The restrictions will expire on Election Day unless changed. DHS maintains that only Americans should elect leaders. A spokesperson said they focus on removing aliens who vote.
They claimed they do not target U.S. citizens. However, lawyers for the government admitted some citizens were reviewed. They said interviews were designed to fix data errors.
Noncitizen voting is rare but has been documented. New Jersey recently found over 6,000 noncitizens on voter rolls. The Justice Department charged 16 individuals in September.
Additional charges were brought in October. The Trump administration has prioritized cracking down on illegal voting. Yet, they have not shown evidence of widespread fraud.
The activist groups suing DHS argued their case would succeed. They claimed DHS violated the Voting Rights Act. The judge agreed that DHS methods likely broke the law.
She pointed to the use of unreliable source data. The ruling protects voters in states led by Democrats. These leaders have opposed strict immigration enforcement policies.
The decision leaves a gap in election security oversight. Voters in these states now face a different legal landscape. The government must wait to see if appeals succeed.
The immediate effect is a pause on field operations. This pause lasts through the critical voting period. The facts remain clear on who issued the order.
The source of the restriction is now public record.