California Voter List of 20,000 "Likely" Noncitizens Called Unreliable
Los Angeles County's preliminary analysis of a federal voter-roll list finds that some people on it appear to have been born in the United States
By AXY Politics Desk ·
Key points
- Los Angeles County election officials say a federal list of 20,000 "likely" noncitizens registered to vote in California is "unreliable."
- Their preliminary analysis found that some people on the list appear to have been born in the United States.
- The list is attributed to the U.S. Department of Justice, and the source material does not say how it was compiled.
- Matching voter records against other databases can produce false matches, which can affect eligible citizens.
- Further county reviews, and responses from state and federal officials, will show whether the problem is limited or wider.
Their preliminary analysis also found that some people flagged on the list appear to have been born in the United States. The finding matters to ordinary voters. A wrong flag can put a person's registration under question just as they are preparing to cast a ballot.
The list is attributed to the U.S. Department of Justice. It names people whom the federal government considers likely to be noncitizens who are registered to vote in California. Federal law bars noncitizens from voting in federal elections, so the goal of such a list is easy to understand. The harder question is whether the names on it are accurate, and the county's early review raises doubts on that point.
What the list is and why it exists
Noncitizens are not allowed to vote in federal elections, including races for Congress and for president. Many states also bar them from voting in state and local contests. That rule is not in dispute. What is difficult is confirming, one person at a time, whether a registered voter is actually a citizen.
The source material describes the list as one of "likely" noncitizens. That word is doing a lot of work. It means the list is a set of flags, not a set of confirmed findings. Someone on the list has not been shown to be ineligible. They have been identified as a possible problem that needs to be checked.
The source material does not say how the 20,000 names were compiled. It also does not describe which databases were used to produce them. Readers should keep that gap in mind, because the method is at the center of the dispute.
How voter rolls are checked
Voter rolls are kept mainly by states, and in practice much of the day-to-day work falls to county election offices. When a person registers, they usually provide a name, a date of birth, an address and, in many cases, a driver's license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number. Election officials use those details to confirm that a registration matches a real, eligible person.
Federal law requires states to keep their voter lists up to date and to remove people who have died or moved, among other reasons. The National Voter Registration Act, a 1993 law, sets out many of these list-maintenance duties. States also have their own rules, and those rules differ. Some states compare their rolls against motor vehicle records or other government data. Some use federal tools that help confirm citizenship status.
That kind of checking is useful, but it is also imperfect. A computer match between two databases can point to a possible problem. It cannot, on its own, prove that a voter is ineligible. Most election offices know this, which is why a flagged name normally leads to a follow-up step rather than an immediate removal.
Why matching records can go wrong
Several ordinary situations can make an honest record look like a noncitizen's. Common names and birth dates can match the wrong person. Addresses change, and old records are not always updated. A person who married and changed their last name may appear under a different name in one database than in another.
Records can also be out of date in ways that have nothing to do with fraud. A person who once held a visa and later became a citizen may still appear in an older government file as a noncitizen. A birthplace can be recorded incorrectly, or a document may never have been corrected. A naturalized citizen can therefore look, on paper, like someone who is not eligible to vote, even though the person is fully eligible.
This is why the claim that some people on the list appear to be U.S.-born is significant. If the county's preliminary review holds up, it suggests that at least some records on the list do not match the people they are meant to describe. A U.S.-born person does not need a visa or a naturalization certificate to be eligible. If the list flags them anyway, the list itself is a problem.
The source material does not say how many U.S.-born people were found in the county's review. That number matters a great deal. A handful of errors in a list of 20,000 would be a different story from errors that run into the thousands, and the reporting so far does not settle that question.
What Los Angeles County found
Los Angeles County is the most populous county in California. Its election office handles a large share of the state's registrations, so its findings carry weight. The county's officials describe their work as preliminary. That word means the review is an early look, not a final accounting.
Still, the conclusion that the list is "unreliable" is a strong statement from the people who would have to act on it. Election staff do not usually describe a federal list in those terms without a reason. The county's analysis, as reported, points to problems with the data rather than with a few individual cases.
In practice, a county that receives a list like this has to decide what to do with each name. Officials can check the registration against original paperwork, contact the voter, or send the record for further review. Each step takes staff time. The county's analysis, as described in the source material, does not establish that any particular voter cast an illegal ballot. It raises a narrower point with wide consequences: the list may be pointing at the wrong people.
Reactions and what is at stake
The disagreement in California fits into a larger national argument about voter rolls. Supporters of tougher checks say states have a duty to remove people who are not eligible, and that rolls should be cleaned up regularly. They argue that an ineligible vote, even a rare one, undermines confidence in elections.
Critics take a different view. They argue that aggressive list-matching can remove eligible citizens, particularly naturalized citizens, people who have changed their names, and people with common names. They also point out that the burden of proving eligibility often falls on the voter, who may not know they have been flagged until a letter arrives.
The stakes are practical. For a registered voter, a wrong flag can mean a letter demanding proof of citizenship, a hearing, or a challenge to their registration. For election offices, it means extra work in the months before an election, when staff are already busy with mail ballots, poll workers and questions from the public. For public trust, it means that eligible people may stop believing the system is designed to count them.
The source material does not include a detailed response from the Department of Justice or from California state officials. This article therefore does not describe their positions beyond what is stated in the headline and in the county's analysis. Readers should look for those responses in future reporting.
What to watch next
Several questions will shape how this story develops. The first is whether the county's preliminary findings hold up in a fuller review. Analysts would expect a more complete check to examine a larger sample of names and compare them against original registration records, not only the data used to build the list.
The second is whether other California counties report similar results. If several local offices find the same kind of mismatch, it would point to a problem with the list itself rather than with one county's records. One county's review is a reason to ask questions. Several would be a stronger signal.
The third is what happens to the people already flagged. Election officials will have to decide whether those voters stay on the rolls while questions are resolved, and how and when they are notified. Rules on that process vary by state and by the type of challenge, and the outcome could affect voters well before the next election.
Finally, readers should watch for a clear count. The number of U.S.-born people identified in the review is the detail that will tell the public how large the problem might be. Until that number is reported, the scale of the issue in California remains unclear.
For readers, the most useful thing to remember is that a list of "likely" noncitizens is a starting point for checking, not a finding of wrongdoing. The gap between "likely" and confirmed is where voters can be harmed, and it is where officials will need to show their work.
Questions and answers
What is the 20,000 'likely' noncitizen list in California?
It is a federal list, attributed to the Department of Justice, of 20,000 people flagged as likely noncitizens registered to vote in California. A flag is a reason to check a registration, not proof that the person is ineligible.
Why do Los Angeles County officials say the list is unreliable?
Their preliminary analysis led them to call the list "unreliable." They also found that some people on it appear to have been born in the United States, which suggests that some records may not match the people they describe.
Does the list mean noncitizens voted illegally in California?
No. The county's analysis, as described in the source material, does not establish that any particular voter cast an illegal ballot. It raises questions about the accuracy of the list itself.
What happens next with the flagged voters?
Election officials will need to review the names, decide whether flagged voters stay on the rolls while questions are resolved, and notify them as required. Further county reviews and responses from state and federal officials will shape the outcome.
Topics: California voter rolls, noncitizen voting, Los Angeles County elections, Department of Justice, voter registration, voter eligibility
Sources: NPR Politics