Trump asks Supreme Court to set aside 20,000 votes
The administration wants disputed mail-in ballots from California set aside, but lower courts previously rejected the request.
There is news on this story (Monday, 2 November 2026, 19:47): Racist campaign heightens tensions in Michigan
Follow-up to: US midterms to put Trump to the test Sunday, 1 November 2026, 19:45
Listen to this article
There is no audio version yet. Request one and an AI voice will read the article aloud.
Read by an AI voice.
The Trump administration went to the US Supreme Court on Monday to prevent around 20,000 disputed mail-in ballots from California being counted in the midterm elections. Lower courts had previously rejected a similar request, after which the administration referred the case to the highest court.
According to The Associated Press, the administration is challenging the validity of around 20,000 votes that it says were cast by people who are not eligible to vote. The precise legal status of those individual ballots has therefore not yet been established. The administration wants election officials to keep the votes separate from the count.
A federal judge in California previously rejected a request to set the ballots aside. According to the judge, such a last-minute intervention could seriously disrupt the organisation of the election. The administration has now referred that rejection to the Supreme Court.
The case comes one day before elections for the US Congress. Those elections determine which party gains a majority in the House of Representatives and the Senate. The political room for manoeuvre available to President Donald Trump in the second half of his term is also at stake.
In California, registered voters are sent their ballot papers by post. According to AP, around 23 million registered voters there received a ballot paper. A rapid legal change to the counting procedure could have consequences for the organisation of the count.
The central question is not only whether the disputed votes ultimately prove valid, but also when and under which procedure that will be established. A ruling by the Supreme Court could have consequences for the count in California and for the wider debate over electoral integrity. For now, it is not known whether the highest court will consider the request on its merits before election day.
Also show the region and a close-up
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The Trump administration has asked the US Supreme Court to exclude around 20,000 disputed mail-in ballots in California from the count.
- Lower courts previously rejected a similar request.
- According to the administration, the disputed votes came from people who were allegedly not eligible to vote; this has not yet been established as a judicial fact.
- The case comes shortly before the elections for the US Congress.
Left
Arguments The priority should be to count all lawfully cast votes and protect election bodies from political interference. A last-minute intervention could deprive voters of their vote without individual cases having been carefully assessed.
Values The right to vote, equal treatment and institutional independence.
Consequences A broad exclusion could undermine confidence in the result and particularly affect voters who use accessible postal voting procedures.
Centre
Arguments Election authorities must exclude invalid votes, but this requires a verifiable procedure that can be reviewed before or after the count. The judiciary must prevent both fraud and chaotic last-minute interventions from determining the result.
Values Legal certainty, practicability and confidence in independent procedures.
Consequences A limited, legally substantiated correction may be defensible; a broad measure shortly before the count increases the risk of confusion.
Right
Arguments Votes cast by people who are not eligible to vote must not be counted, even when enforcement is politically sensitive. On this view, a rapid judicial review is needed to prevent invalid votes from affecting the result.
Values Enforcement of voting rules, accountability and protection of the election result.
Consequences Strict scrutiny can increase voters’ confidence in the integrity of the system, but careless exclusion can affect valid votes.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The article’s central point is based directly on an Associated Press report of 2 November 2026. Uncertainties about the legal status of the votes and a possible ruling are explicitly presented as uncertain.
- confirmed The Trump administration went to the US Supreme Court on 2 November over around 20,000 disputed mail-in ballots in California. — Reported by Associated Press. source
- confirmed Lower courts had previously rejected a request to set the votes aside. — Reported by Associated Press. source
- confirmed California has around 23 million registered voters who receive a ballot paper by post. — Reported by Associated Press. source
Editor's note
It is certain that the Trump administration has lodged an appeal and that lower courts previously rejected the request. The legal assessment of the individual votes and any decision by the Supreme Court were still unknown at the time of publication.Sources
The story so far
- Sunday, 1 November 2026, 19:45 US midterms to put Trump to the test
- Monday, 2 November 2026, 18:15 Trump asks Supreme Court to set aside 20,000 votes (this article)
- Monday, 2 November 2026, 19:47 Racist campaign heightens tensions in Michigan
More on this in Dutch media
- NRC — „amerikaanse verkiezingen”
- NU.nl — „amerikaanse verkiezingen”
- De Telegraaf — „amerikaanse verkiezingen”