{"id":181,"date":"2026-06-11T11:05:26","date_gmt":"2026-06-11T11:05:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/homemovechronicle.com\/?p=181"},"modified":"2026-06-11T11:05:26","modified_gmt":"2026-06-11T11:05:26","slug":"the-trump-dojs-threat-against-californias-vote-is-a-bluff","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/homemovechronicle.com\/?p=181","title":{"rendered":"The Trump DOJ\u2019s Threat Against California\u2019s Vote Is a Bluff"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

This is <\/em>Executive Dysfunction<\/em>, a newsletter that highlights one under-the-radar story about how Trump is changing the law\u2014or how the law is pushing back\u2014and keeps you posted on the latest from Slate\u2019s Jurisprudence team. <\/em>Click here<\/em> to receive it in your inbox each week.<\/em><\/p>\n

Read more Republicans Have the Chance to Do the Funniest Thing Ever With Todd Blanche\u2019s Nomination<\/a><\/p>\n

When it started to become clear that President Donald Trump\u2019s chosen candidate in Los Angeles\u2019 mayoral race\u2014reality star turned MAGA hero Spencer Pratt\u2014was headed for defeat, he wasted no time pivoting to his old playbook. \u201cThere\u2019s BIG cheating by the Dumocrats in California,\u201d Trump posted two days after the state\u2019s primary election, citing not a single piece of evidence. Within 24 hours, the First Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California Bill Essayli announced his office was conducting numerous election fraud investigations. It\u2019s more than likely a smoke-and-mirrors show that accomplishes two things, neither of which have anything to do with fraud: Seed doubt in California\u2019s elections and every state across the country while working a practice round for phony prosecutions that are likely to come up again during the upcoming midterm election cycle and beyond.<\/p>\n

\n<\/div>\n

California held its nonpartisan primary last week, and one of the most closely watched contests was the Los Angeles mayoral race. Incumbent Democrat Karen Bass was up against progressive City Council member Nithya Raman and Pratt, who is a registered Republican. California uses \u201cblanket\u201d primaries, which means the top-two vote-getters advance to the general election regardless of party. The race was shaking out to be mighty close, and as the first initial votes were tallied, Pratt was leading Raman for the second spot behind Bass, but by Sunday Raman began to pull ahead. Come Monday she was leading Pratt by nearly 22,000 votes and was being declared the second finalist for November\u2019s general election. This delayed overtaking of Pratt by Raman was largely expected, because California\u2019s vote-by-mail system accepts ballots postmarked on or before Election Day and received within seven days of the election. Yet, on Monday, Trump weighed in to say, \u201cNot possible for Spencer Pratt to have lost the L.A. runoffs after the big lead he had.\u201d<\/p>\n

Indeed, it was possible for Pratt to have lost, as Republicans tend to vote in person and those ballots are counted first. Democrats tend to vote early and by mail, ballots that are counted later in the vote tallying process, which is why Raman\u2019s lead over Pratt took a few days to register. Now, Trump is deeply familiar with this process but simply does not like it, and he\u2019s been actively trying to limit mail voting and federalize U.S. elections, despite the Constitution explicitly giving states the power to facilitate their own elections. (A lawsuit is currently challenging Trump\u2019s executive order on mail voting). Anyone who attempts to take action based on Trump\u2019s words, namely Essayli in this context, is doing so purely to appease the White House and without any real end goal in mind.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhen the government has a case, it brings an indictment, and serious law enforcement investigators almost always keep their investigation under wraps until the indictment is issued,\u201d Chad Dunn, legal director of the UCLA Voting Rights Project, told me. \u201cWhenever I see the government, whether it\u2019s in the voting context or otherwise, broadcasting it has an investigation, I\u2019m immediately suspicious that this is performative.\u201d California Gov. Gavin Newsom echoed a similar sentiment, his office telling Politico that \u201cCredible prosecutors don\u2019t comment on ongoing investigations, including whether an investigation exists at all. We\u2019re not surprised the First Assistant doesn\u2019t operate similarly.\u201d<\/p>\n

When Essayli announced his office \u201chas multiple election fraud investigations underway,\u201d he also made sure to criticize California\u2019s vote-by-mail procedures, accusing the state of having serious structural vulnerabilities and no voter ID requirements. This is deceiving, as California does require identification when eligible residents register to vote for the first time. It\u2019s also allowed vote by mail for decades, expanding it during the COVID-19 pandemic so that every registered voter in California receives a mail ballot. It\u2019s also worth noting that Los Angeles County is the single largest in the country, home to 10 million people, which means the ballot-counting process will inherently take time. \u201cThere have been no credible investigations in California and Los Angeles that suggest there\u2019s any widespread voter fraud. There\u2019s none,\u201d Matt Barreto, professor of political science at UCLA and faculty director of the UCLA Voting Rights Project, told me.<\/p>\n

What\u2019s really happening here is that Trump has a bone to pick with California, the most Democratic-leaning state in the country helmed by the outgoing Newsom, who is not only one of Trump\u2019s biggest antagonists but is rumored to be a 2028 contender for president. Oh, and it\u2019s also home to former Vice President Kamala Harris. The Los Angeles mayoral race was considered a lock for Democrats, but with the incumbent mayor facing unpopularity after her perceived botched handling of the Palisades Fire in January last year, the race was suddenly competitive. Pratt, who has never held elected office before, jumped into the race as an outsider demanding to shake up the system, embodying the same spirit that buoyed Trump to political success. Two weeks before California\u2019s June 2 primary, Trump endorsed Pratt. \u201cI\u2019d like to see him do well. He\u2019s a character. I heard he\u2019s a big MAGA person. He\u2019s doing well.\u201d<\/p>\n

After California\u2019s primary day came and went, and poll workers continued to count mail ballots, as per state law, Pratt\u2019s loss became more apparent. This is exactly what happened during the 2020 presidential election, as Joe Biden edged out Trump in the days following Election Day. And that was far from the first time an election was not immediately called, as the 2000 election between Democrat Al Gore and Republican George W. Bush took nearly two months to be decided.<\/p>\n

Despite this being a completely normal process for U.S. elections, Trump seems perennially ready with bogus, unsubstantiated claims of fraud. \u201cHe claims, like a sore loser, that when he loses there must be fraud,\u201d Barreto said. \u201cBut when he wins, everything\u2019s fine.\u201d<\/p>\n

Barreto believes the current slate of primary elections happening across the country is a testing ground to see how far Trump can push to disenfranchise voters and trample on democracy. Today it\u2019s California, but tomorrow it can very well be another state that produces an election result that the president doesn\u2019t like. As Republicans and Trump face historically low approval ratings, they are growing increasingly desperate to salvage their power, hence the ongoing redistricting war and, possibly, more federal investigations like Essayli\u2019s.<\/p>\n

Read more There\u2019s a Terrible Reason Why This Ebola Outbreak Is Different<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cThe single most dangerous threat to democracy is not California taking a week to count its ballots, the single greatest threat to democracy is the president and his followers trying to undermine confidence in our accurate and legal electoral system,\u201d Barreto said.<\/p>\n

We hope you learned a thing or two from this edition of Executive Dysfunction, and if you enjoyed reading it, please consider <\/em>supporting our legal journalism by becoming a Slate Plus member<\/em>!<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

Elsewhere in Jurisprudence<\/p>\n<\/h3>\n