SEATTLE — A federal judge in Seattle has barred the Trump administration from forcing Washington state to set aside ballots cast by voters on a flawed federal list, ruling that the Justice Department’s threats of criminal prosecution against election officials amounted to coercion rather than a request. U.S. District Judge Jamal N. Whitehead signed a 14-day temporary restraining order on Thursday, November 5, 2026, blocking the Justice Department and Homeland Security from forcing Washington officials to remove named voters from the rolls or set aside their votes in the 2026 general election.

Key Points

• Judge Jamal N. Whitehead’s 14-day temporary restraining order of November 5, 2026, in OneAmerica Votes v. Trump, bars the Justice Department from forcing Washington to set aside ballots.
• The order also forbids threatening election workers with criminal prosecution for counting ballots as state law requires.
• The case centres on an October 26 letter listing about 400 voters the Justice Department claimed “are or were noncitizens” — while conceding they “may have subsequently naturalized.”
• Washington’s review found the list flawed: at least 62 people on it never received ballots, and others had already proved U.S. citizenship.
• The Justice Department must oppose a longer injunction by November 12; the hearing is November 18, and certifications are due November 24.

What Happened

Whitehead signed the order at 4:21 p.m. on Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, and it took effect immediately. It names Attorney General Todd Blanche, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, and prosecutors Pete Serrano and Neil Floyd, and bars them from demanding that any Washington election official remove specific voters from the rolls, refuse them ballots, or decline to count their ballots. The judge also refused to put the order on hold while the administration appeals, so the protection lasts the full 14 days unless extended. The suit was filed on October 30 by OneAmerica Votes, the Latino Community Fund of Washington State and the United Food and Commercial Workers union. The ruling does not stop federal investigations of unlawful voting. What it blocks is coercion.

Background: The October 26 Letter and a Flawed List

The dispute began on October 26, just eight days before Election Day, when prosecutors Serrano and Floyd sent Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs a list of roughly 400 registered voters whom federal agencies suspected of being noncitizens. The letter gave Hobbs 48 hours to tell counties to stop counting those voters’ ballots and warned more names would follow. That same day, federal officials warned publicly that election workers who processed those ballots could face prosecution. After Hobbs refused, Serrano threatened to take the demands directly to county officials. Washington’s review then found serious problems: at least 62 people on the list had never been sent ballots, because their registrations were cancelled, inactive, or could not be located, and others had already proved U.S. citizenship. The Justice Department had made a similar demand in California for about 20,000 ballots; federal courts rejected it, and the Supreme Court declined to intervene on November 2.

What Judge Whitehead Said

Whitehead rejected the administration’s argument that its letter to Hobbs was only a request for cooperation. “On this record, Defendants did not ask,” he wrote. “They directed Washington to set aside specific voters’ ballots, set a deadline, told election officials they would be prosecuted if they counted those ballots as state law requires.” The judge found the administration had likely exceeded its legal authority, and warned it cannot use a criminal law against noncitizen voting to seize control of state election procedures, endangering naturalized citizens wrongly flagged by federal databases. “A threat of prosecution made for that purpose is not legal advice,” Whitehead wrote. “It is the pressure that makes the demand work, and the order restrains the two together.” He added: “Voters who followed the rules should not lose their votes to a list that even its authors admit may include citizens.”

Why the Washington Ballots Ruling Matters

The Washington ballots ruling matters because it draws a line between investigating illegal voting and using the threat of prison to rewrite how a state counts lawful votes. Washington votes almost entirely by mail, and counties were still processing ballots when the order landed, so it protects votes already cast. It also matters for naturalized citizens, who can be swept up by a list built from incomplete records even after proving their status. The ruling fits a wider pattern of defeats for the administration’s election-intervention campaign. A federal judge in California blocked a similar demand to segregate ballots, and the Supreme Court refused to let the Justice Department set aside California ballots on November 2. In a separate case, a judge blocked federal pressure over noncitizen voting before the midterms.

Reactions

The groups that brought the lawsuit welcomed the ruling as a defence of state-run elections. “The Trump administration issued an inappropriate eleventh-hour demand, backed by threats of prosecution, to set aside the ballots of voters that even they admit may be eligible citizens,” said Abha Khanna, a partner at the Elias Law Group. “Washington runs its own elections, and every eligible Washingtonian deserves to have their ballot counted without federal interference.” Roxana Norouzi, executive director of OneAmerica Votes, said: “It was clear to Washingtonians, and to the court, that these efforts to sow mistrust in our elections were about suppressing the will of voters.” The Justice Department did not immediately respond.

What Happens Next

The temporary order runs for 14 days from November 5 unless the court extends it. The Justice Department must file its opposition to a longer preliminary injunction by November 12, and the court will hold a hearing on the plaintiffs’ request on November 18. Washington counties must certify their results by November 24. The administration can still appeal and still investigate individual cases of unlawful voting. What it cannot do while the order stands is demand that Washington set aside named voters’ ballots or threaten the officials who count them.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did Judge Whitehead’s order actually do?
For 14 days, it bars the Justice Department and Homeland Security from demanding that Washington officials remove named voters from the rolls or set aside their ballots, and from threatening officials with prosecution for counting votes as state law requires.

Why was the federal list considered flawed?
Washington found at least 62 people on the roughly 400-name list never received ballots because their registrations were cancelled, inactive or unfindable, and others had already proved U.S. citizenship.

Can the Justice Department still investigate noncitizen voting?
Yes. The government may still investigate and prosecute unlawful voting, share information, and seek voluntary cooperation. The order only blocks coercive demands and threats.

What happens on November 18?
The court will hear whether to issue a preliminary injunction extending the protection beyond the 14-day order while the lawsuit continues.

How does this ruling relate to the California ballot cases?
Courts also rejected the bid to force California to set aside about 20,000 ballots, and the Supreme Court declined to intervene on November 2. Washington applies the same principle to a new state and list.