House Democrats' No. 3 leader is under fire for his opposition to voter ID in his home state of California.
House Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., spoke at a press conference earlier this month criticizing a measure on Californians' ballot this Election Day that, if passed, would mandate that voters show government-issued photo ID at the polls.
He made the comments just weeks before the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a crime bust that saw several U.S. permanent residents accused of registering to vote despite not being citizens.
Rep. Ken Calvert, R-Calif., hammered Aguilar's opposition to voter ID and argued the DOJ's recent actions made it "obvious" that the ballot measure, called Proposition 39, was needed.
"Give me a break," Calvert told Fox News Digital. "You have to show an ID to board an airplane, cash a paycheck, rent an apartment or even buy cold medicine at the grocery store. Democrats claiming that requiring photo ID before casting a ballot is somehow 'racist' or 'voter suppression' is complete nonsense and an insult to every voter's intelligence."
Rep. Vince Fong, R-Calif., said voter ID "is basic election security that the vast majority of Americans support, and 36 states already require."
"While opponents are resorting to lies and fearmongering, Proposition 39 is commonsense reform in a world where you need an ID to rent a car, stay at a hotel, open a bank account or board a flight," Fong told Fox News Digital. "The DOJ's recent voter fraud bust in California is exactly why these safeguards matter."
Rep. Young Kim, R-Calif., similarly said showing photo ID is a "simple standard we already require to board a plane, purchase alcohol or pick up a prescription."
"This isn't controversial and it shouldn't be complicated. Our elections deserve at least as much consideration as a beer or a bottle of wine," Kim told Fox News Digital.
Aguilar, meanwhile, criticized Proposition 39 during a press conference with Democratic gubernatorial candidate and former Biden administration Cabinet Secretary Xavier Becerra earlier this month.
"We will not stand for this, because we will not stand for people to lose an opportunity to exercise their ability to vote. In Arizona, they tried this. They wanted folks to put their driver's license numbers on their ballots. Think about that. What if you miss one digit? Your vote doesn't count?" Aguilar proposed. "What if you're married in California? What if you're married, and you haven't changed your name and you go to vote? No longer will you be able to vote. That is what is at stake for Californians."
He called it a "voter suppression effort" pushed by Republicans.
"Republicans can win only when they suppress the vote. Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans know that they are bankrupt of ideas and solutions, and so they have to change the rules of the game," Aguilar said.
Meanwhile, the California government criticized the DOJ's operation while pointing to reports that said more of those charged were registered as Republicans rather than Democrats.
"For nearly a decade, Trump has baselessly alleged mass voter fraud rings were employed by Democrats and utilized 'illegal immigrants' to sway elections across the country â often pointing to California," a release on Gov. Gavin Newsom's state website read. "Courts at all levels have rejected the claims of vast voter fraud or that elections were rigged against the President."
Voter ID laws currently exist in 36 states and polls have shown they have a majority of Americans' support.
But in Congress, several efforts to pass federal voter ID legislation have been thwarted by Democrats in recent years.
Muslim leftist Michigan U.S. Senate candidate Abdulrahman El-Sayed on Wednesday rejected requiring proof of citizenship and voter ID for elections, calling GOP-led efforts to secure U.S. elections "about voter suppression."
Governor Gavin Newsom and Bill Essayli, a Trump-appointed federal prosecutor in California, sparred on social media this week about whether the state is doing enough to prevent noncitizens from voting.
Essayli, the first assistant U.S. attorney for California's Central District, surfaced a court document filed Tuesday in which a Los Angeles County election official said the registrar's office "is not equipped or authorized to verify voter citizenship because it does not independently house citizenship-related information beyond the voter attestation."
The official, Monica Flores, made the declaration as part of a Justice Department lawsuit seeking to force California to verify the citizenship of more than 20,000 people the federal government believes are likely noncitizens who were sent mail ballots ahead of this year's midterm elections.
Essayli called Flores' statement a "massive concession" that shows election officials take voters' word on whether they are a citizen.
"American citizens’ votes are being diluted in California," Essayli wrote.
In response, Newsom's press office account on X said California adheres to a 1993 federal law that requires people registering to vote through the DMV to swear under penalty of perjury that they are eligible, including that they are U.S. citizens. Similar attestation requirements apply to federal mail-in voter registration forms.
"May want to brush up on your election law before tweeting," Newsom's office wrote in a jab at Essayli. "Perhaps Second Assistant is more apt from now on?"
The public spat highlighted the central dispute in the lawsuit against California: whether the state should take additional steps to verify the citizenship of voters when the federal government flags potential issues with the rolls.
According to the Justice Department's complaint, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) cross-checked California voter registration records with federal immigration data.
That investigative process, described by DOJ lawyers as "preliminary," yielded a list of more than 20,000 registered voters federal investigators identified as likely noncitizens. California voters were mailed ballots beginning Oct. 1.
In its initial complaint filed Oct. 15, the Justice Department asked a federal court to require California to set aside mail ballots associated with people on the list until their citizenship could be verified.
Flores, an official with the LA County Registrar's Office, argued that doing so is now virtually impossible because once a ballot's signature is verified, it is removed from its identifying envelope and processed alongside hundreds of thousands of others.
As of Tuesday, the county has processed 331,000 ballots, according to Flores' statement in court.
She also pointed out that the registrar's office is "not an investigative agency," adding that she was unaware of "any state or federal law granting it investigative authority."
Nonetheless, staff from the registrar's office reviewed a sample of 200 records from the Justice Department list that had LA County addresses.
"The October list is unreliable: 112 of the 200 records correspond to registrations that are canceled or inactive," according to Flores' statement. "Of the voters where birthplace was meaningfully reported, 38.9% indicate that they were born in the United States, which is strong evidence of citizenship; and 71.2% of the records have no voting history."
In a statement to Fox News, Essayli said these reported numbers "are meaningless because, by their own admission, they have no way to verify anyone's citizenship status or their birthplace."
There are indications that the Justice Department list does contain at least some individuals who could have broken the law.
On Monday, the Justice Department charged 28 individuals off that list, all lawful permanent residents, with making false statements on naturalization applications and fraudulently registering to vote. Most of them cast unlawful ballots in elections, officials said.
A “massive concession” claim emerged Tuesday in the federal dispute over California’s voter rolls after Los Angeles County officials told a court they cannot independently verify voters’ citizenship beyond what voters state on their registration forms.
The diverse, multifaith group is training all the way through the end of October online and in person learning de-escalation techniques and equipping themselves with knowledge of local laws and resources.
Early voting in two Republican strongholds puts Latino voters’ priorities and President Donald Trump’s declining approval under scrutiny.
Early voting began Monday in Texas and most Florida counties, setting the stage for closely watched midterm contests in two Republican strongholds where Latino voters’ concerns over inflation, immigration and public safety could shape the electoral landscape.
With Latinos accounting for 40% of Texas’ population and 28.7% of Florida’s, both states offer a key test of the parties’ ability to attract Hispanic voters. Economic pressures, rising living costs, immigration policy and public safety are among the issues shaping voters’ priorities.
In Florida, voters turned out early in heavily Hispanic areas, including Miami-Dade County and Doral. Their concerns varied: some pointed to rising food and fuel prices and the strain on households and small businesses, while others emphasized public safety, education and support for the Trump administration.
Foreign policy and immigration have also exposed divisions within the community. In Doral, home to a significant Venezuelan population, tensions over the conflict with Iran and its potential impact on oil prices have added to debate over the administration’s tougher immigration policies.
🗳️ EE. UU.: comenzó la votación anticipada en Texas, que se suma a Georgia y Arizona. Las elecciones del 3 de noviembre definirán el control del Congreso. #teleSUR#19octpic.twitter.com/EHFa1yUbOU
Text Reads: 🗳️ U.S.: Early voting has begun in Texas, joining Georgia and Arizona. The November 3 elections will determine control of Congress.
The early voting period coincides with a decline in Trump’s approval among Hispanic voters, according to a recent Pew Research Center study. His approval rating stood at 24% in October, down from 38% in February 2025, at the beginning of his term.
The figures come as both parties compete in high-profile state and congressional races. In Florida, Republican Byron Donalds and Democrat David Jolly are vying for the governorship in a contest that has proved closer than expected. Republican Representative María Elvira Salazar is seeking re-election in the state’s 27th Congressional District against Democratic challenger Eliott Rodríguez.
In Texas, Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton faces Democrat James Talarico in the Senate race, while Republican Governor Greg Abbott is challenged by state legislator Gina Hinojosa.
Democrats are hoping that declining support for Trump among Hispanic voters, combined with greater participation in early and mail-in voting, will help them contest key seats in the House of Representatives and Senate. Republicans, meanwhile, are seeking to maintain their dominance in both states through the end of the voting period.
Federal officials have arrested roughly two dozen individuals in connection with illegal voting in California, which comes after the Justice Department warned California officials to review a list of possible noncitizens on the state’s voter rolls.
Lengthy meeting heard grumbles about ‘blue wall’ policies and ‘Ming vase’ tactics but no real rancour
As political showdowns go, this week’s gathering of Liberal Democrat MPs, billed by some as a crunch moment for Ed Davey, was a touch underwhelming. “I had expected a damp squib,” one attender put it. “It was damper than I thought.”
Far from generating a mass of opposition to Davey’s leadership, let alone a formal challenge to his position, the lengthy gathering in a Commons committee room on Tuesday evening brought a few minor grumbles, but little else.
Nearly 3,000 events nationwide urged voters to cast ballots early ahead of November 3 elections that will determine control of Congress.
The No Kings movement held nearly 3,000 rallies and marches across the United States on Saturday, urging voters to cast their ballots early in the November 3 midterm elections, as the Trump administration intensified its efforts to challenge mail-in voting and scrutinize ballots cast by suspected noncitizens.
The nationwide mobilization, held under the slogan “No Kings: Vote Early,” drew millions of participants, according to USA Today, with events in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. The demonstrations came two weeks before elections that will determine whether Republicans retain control of Congress for the final two years of President Donald Trump’s term.
Organizers said the campaign aimed to turn mass mobilization into electoral participation by encouraging voters to make voting plans, cast their ballots early and help protect every eligible vote. They argued that historically high turnout would make it harder for the Trump administration to challenge the results by alleging fraud.
“Across thousands of events in all 50 states and DC today, we are turning enormous people power into direct voter power,” the No Kings Coalition said in a social media statement. It described the initiative as a nationwide effort to encourage early voting and build a network of Americans prepared to defend eligible ballots.
Text Reads: Demonstrations in Washington, U.S., under the slogan “No Kings: Vote Early,” seek to channel political protest into electoral participation. They call for placing limits on President Trump and protecting the Constitution ahead of the elections.
The coalition also pointed to the rising cost of groceries, gasoline, electricity and other daily necessities, arguing that decisions made by political leaders directly shape families’ lives and economic prospects. It presented the early-voting campaign as the next step in reclaiming political influence after a year of mass demonstrations.
In Atlanta, city council member Michael Julian Bond urged rally participants to encourage others to vote before Election Day rather than wait until the last minute.
“The Constitution gives you a power. That is the power of the vote,” Bond told the crowd.
In Phoenix, Arizona, Democratic Senator Rubén Gallego linked the campaign to opposition to the Trump administration’s policies, accusing the president and congressional Republicans of worsening economic conditions for ordinary Americans while enriching their allies.
“Today, we voted early to send a message loud and clear: no to separating our families, no to corruption, no to no oligarchs, no to stupid forever wars, and no kings.,” Gallego wrote on X.
Today, we voted early to send a message loud and clear: no to separating our families, no to corruption, no to no oligarchs, no to stupid forever wars, and no kings. https://t.co/qtT9Gp7Lwf
Democratic Representative Yassamin Ansari, who also attended the Phoenix rally, called the upcoming election “the most important election of our lives.” She cited the administration’s deportation policies, the war in Iran, cuts to health care and food assistance, and widespread corruption allegations as central issues facing voters.
Ansari questioned whether Americans would accept immigration enforcement practices that frighten communities and separate families, policies that leave millions without health care, or what she described as a transfer of wealth from working people to billionaires.
The protests unfolded amid heightened political tensions over Trump’s deployment of military personnel to several cities governed by Democrats. The administration has justified the deployments as a way to combat crime and support immigration enforcement operations.
The demonstrations were backed by a broad coalition of organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Federation of Teachers, Black Voters Matter Fund, Indivisible, MoveOn, Public Citizen, State Voices and Voto Latino.
The push for early voting also came as the Trump administration pursued legal action against mail-in ballots. Trump has repeatedly attacked mail voting and continued to claim, without evidence, that electoral fraud cost him the 2020 presidential election.
On Thursday, the administration sued California election officials, asking a judge to bar the state from counting mail-in ballots in the midterm elections cast by people the federal government considers likely to be noncitizens until their immigration status can be verified.
On Friday, the Justice Department warned local election officials that processing and counting ballots submitted by suspected noncitizens could expose them to criminal investigations and prosecution.
Also on Friday, Democratic Senators Alex Padilla of California, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Dick Durbin of Illinois wrote to Attorney General Todd Blanche, demanding assurances that the Justice Department would not seize ballots or other election materials before the midterm results were certified.
Demonstrators hold signs during a "No Kings" protest at the South Carolina Statehouse.
Sean Rayford/Getty Images
Meta says its system detected intense bursts of activity by a Claude tool.
That triggered an automatic shutdown and locked admins out of the account.
It happened during a day of rallies promoting early voting in the midterms.
Meta said Sunday that its systems suspended the No Kings movement's Instagram account during its day of action because it detected "intense" activity by a Claude tool.
The account was locked and administrators were denied access for "several hours" during nationwide rallies on Saturday to mobilize early voting in the midterms, the group said.
Meta initially said that an automatic trigger was responsible for shutting down the account "in error," but offered a fuller explanation a day later.
"Our engineering team discovered that the spike that triggered the incorrect enforcement was primarily in the account's 'reading' behavior," spokesperson Andy Stone said in an X post.
"Specifically, our network security systems detected the use of a Claude tool reading profiles, posts, and hashtags, the rate of which sharply increased (~4x volume) in intense bursts on October 17. "
Stone said the activity resembled bot traffic, prompting the system to take the account offline.
"An automated re-review of the removal action an hour later recognized that shouldn't have happened and restored the account. It unfortunately took additional time for us to straighten out the situation with admin access to the IG account.
"We want to reiterate our sincere apology for the error," he wrote.
The No Kings network, which bills itself as nonpartisan but arose last year in response to President Donald Trump's actions, said it held nearly 3,000 rallies across the country to encourage voters to cast their ballots early as a hedge against any effort to undermine turnout.
"Restricting communications about voting in the middle of an election is unacceptable," it said.
"Meta must answer for this suspension and take immediate steps to ensure it never happens again — to any account, but especially those working to inform voters and encourage participation in our democracy."
Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut called for an investigation into the shutdown, saying on Sunday evening that even if it was made in error, the incident was a "total indictment of Meta's outsized influence on our culture and politics."
"If it wasn't malevolence, it was likely a natural consequence of a company that is desperate to get as close to Trump as possible (and thus has a disincentive to do the basic, proactive work to be ready to support users on No Kings Day)," he wrote in a post on X.
The senator, who has advocated for stricter regulation and anti-monopoly laws against Big Tech, said Meta's significant share of the political discourse market comes with a responsibility for it to be ready for "major moments of political action."
October 18, 2026: This story was updated with public comment from Sen. Chris Murphy.
President Donald Trump promised jail for California officials who don’t heed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) warning that they will be criminally charged if they include the mail-in ballots of the some 200,000 people reportedly identified as potential noncitizens in their midterm election tallies.
Thousands of “No Kings” protests are being held across the country on Saturday for a “nationwide day of action” amid the start of the early voting period in many states. Previous country-wide protest days led by the No Kings Coalition have been aimed at denouncing President Trump and his administration’s policies. The Oct. 17 day…
Voting rights advocates fear the Trump administration may use the federal government to cast doubt on the election, discourage participation or try to delegitimize results.
The Trump administration is escalating its fight with California ahead of next month's midterm election, warning that local officials who process and tabulate ballots submitted by suspected noncitizen voters are putting themselves at risk of criminal investigation and potential prosecution.
Justice Department actions against state election laws highlight growing national conflict over voter registration lists and mail-in voting security.
Mail-in voting is an established mechanism in the United States election system. It lets eligible citizens cast their votes by mail instead of going to the polling place on Election Day.
Over the past decades, state governments have modified vote-by-mail laws to lower administrative costs, increase turnout, and provide alternative access for citizens who face logistical challenges on election days.
In this in-depth article, we will explore the history of mail-in voting, its characteristics, and why the current Trump administration has sought to alter this voting system.
History and the Rationale for Mail-In Voting
Remote voting in the United States dates back to the American Civil War (1861 – 1865). During this war, Union and Confederate soldiers who were away from their districts were permitted to submit written absentee ballots so that deployment would not disenfranchise them.
Throughout the 20th century, the mailing vote expanded beyond military personnel. State governments initially granted absentee ballots to civilians who were ill, physically disabled, or traveling for business on Election Day. Later, lawmakers introduced no-excuse absentee voting, which allowed registered voters to request a mail ballot without providing a specific reason.
In November 1998, Oregon became the first state to conduct all primary elections entirely by mail. By 2000, Oregon conducted the first mail-in presidential election in the U.S., achieving a registered voter participation of over 80 percent. Following Oregon’s model, other states, including Washington, Colorado, Utah, and Hawaii, transitioned to universal vote-by-mail systems after 2020.
Several practical factors explain the implementation of mail-in voting. For voters, it eliminates common obstacles associated with in-person voting, such as work, child care responsibilities, and long lines at precinct polling sites.
For the U.S. administration, state-wide vote-by-mail reduces the need for temporary poll workers, lowers equipment purchases for physical polling locations, and decreases operational expenses on election days.
A US judge declined to block President Trump's executive order tightening rules on mail-in voting, but left the door open for the Democratic Party to challenge it again after the administration takes further steps to implement the measure https://t.co/VDZv3TJZdIpic.twitter.com/cGujpkjY4o
Mail-in voting operates through structured legal protocols designed to maintain ballot security and track individual submissions. State election offices verify registered voter addresses and signatures, using databases before mailing official ballot materials.
After a voter completes their ballot, they can return it by U.S. Postal Service or place it in a designated local election drop box. Upon receipt, election workers process the ballot through signature verification procedures.
Empirical research shows that voter fraud in mail-in systems is extremely rare. Academic studies and data compiled by the Brennan Center for Justice indicate that the total rate of mail voting fraud over general elections averages 0.000043 percent, or roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast.
U.S. State election officials rely on barcoded envelopes, secure chain-of-custody procedures, and signature checks to prevent duplicate submissions and preserve election integrity.
Nearly 1,400 North Carolina voters are getting letters questioning their citizenship, all because the Trump administration's SAVE system flagged them.
The state elections board’s vague letter asks these voters to prove they’re citizens, even as the board acknowledges the system… pic.twitter.com/UJPyeLn0VM
Institutional Mechanics and the 2020 Pandemic Pivot
Mail-in voting requires precise administrative coordination between state election agencies, postal services, and voters. When the U.S. implements universal mail-in voting or no-excuse absentee voting, election authorities cross-reference voter registration databases to ensure accurate residential addresses.
Once ballots are printed, they are mailed to registered voters with instructions, a secrecy sleeve, and a pre-paid or postage-guaranteed return envelope.
Security throughout this process relies on multi-step verification systems. When a voter completes their ballot, they place it inside the secrecy sleeve, seal it within the signature-required return envelope, and sign a legal affirmation printed on the exterior.
Election offices process these returned envelopes by running them through automated sorting machines and optical scanners that capture the voter’s signature. Bipartisan teams of election workers compare the signature against official registration records, such as state driver’s license files or original voter registration cards.
The COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 triggered a transformation in U.S. elections. To prevent viral transmission at crowded indoor polling places, numerous states rapidly expanded mail-in voting options, allowing millions of citizens to vote remotely.
According to reports from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, the voters by mail grew to 46 percent nationwide in 2020, more than doubling the fraction recorded in 2016. Conversely, the share of voters casting ballots in person on Election Day dropped from 60 percent to 28 percent.
Following the pandemic emergency, several states, including California, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, and Vermont, permanently codified universal vote-by-mail systems into law, establishing remote ballot delivery as a permanent fixture of their electoral infrastructure.
A US federal judge has blocked restrictions on mail-in voting backed by US President Donald Trump.
Judge Emmet Sullivan ruled the measures would likely violate a 2021 settlement requiring expedited handling of mail ballots by the US Postal Service.
Partisan Realignment, Demographic Realities, and the Red Mirage
The widespread adoption of mail-in voting reshaped traditional patterns of voter participation and introduced complex dynamics in how election results are reported.
Despite assumptions that mail-in voting consistently favors a single political party, demographic and class analyses demonstrate that vote-by-mail systems benefit diverse working-class populations across the political spectrum.
Low-wage workers, hourly wage earners, agricultural laborers, and caretakers often lack the schedule flexibility required to stand in long lines during restricted polling hours.
Universal mail-in voting removes these temporal and economic barriers, facilitating participation for working families in both urban centers and rural conservative districts, such as in Utah and Montana, where mail-in voting has enjoyed long-standing bipartisan acceptance.
The differing timelines required to process mail-in ballots also created a phenomenon known as the “red mirage.” Because mail-in ballots require time-intensive signature verification, flattening, and manual extraction before they can be counted, many states process in-person votes first on election night.
This operational sequence frequently caused early vote counts to show a temporary lead for candidates who performed strongly among in-person voters, while subsequent processing of mail-in ballots altered vote totals over the following days.
This structural delay in reporting complete totals became a central focal point in post-election legal disputes and public debates over election administration.
🚨 JUST IN: Trump hints he could declare a national emergency for the midterms pic.twitter.com/YLdHlqyktS
— Republicans against Trump (@RpsAgainstTrump) August 11, 2026
Donald Trump’s Stance and Legal Action Against California
President Donald Trump has maintained a vocal opposition to mail-in voting. In public addresses, Trump has repeatedly alleged that universal mail-in voting systems lead to widespread election fraud and unfair outcomes.
Despite using absentee mail-in voting himself in past state elections, Trump argued throughout his campaigns and current presidency that expanding mail-in voting undermines public trust in election administration.
The Trump administration has taken direct executive actions aimed at curtailing mail ballot access. Policy changes and administrative decisions have altered operational procedures at the U.S. Postal Service, including adjustments to sorting equipment and delivery guidelines.
The Department of Justice filed a federal lawsuit targeting California’s election procedures. California established a universal mail-in voting model by enacting legislation requiring county election officials to send a mail ballot to every active registered voter in the state.
The lawsuit by the federal government argued that California’s system creates risks of unlawful voting and challenged state oversight of its official voter registration lists.
Specifically, the federal complaint alleged that California had failed to conduct proper voter roll maintenance, citing federal lists regarding individuals flagged as noncitizens who were sent mail ballots.
The lawsuit sought a court order to block state election officials from counting certain mail-in ballots ahead of the elections. In response, California state officials, including the Attorney General and Secretary of State, defended the legal validity of universal mail-in voting.
State leaders noted that California law relies on signature matching, secure drop-box monitoring, and continuous voter file updates to verify voter identity and maintain system integrity, while arguing that federal interventions violate laws restricting voter roll changes close to an election. Courts continue to review these challenges regarding federal authority over state-administered election laws.
.@SenatorSlotkin (D-MI) warns of President Trump using a national emergency "ruse" to gain American trust: "If you hear in the next 34 days that there is a new security threat… that somehow requires federal law enforcement or the military… an alarm bell should go off." pic.twitter.com/fFPyLjjJs6
Mail-in voting remains an essential tool in modern American election administration. From its origins, mail-in voting has provided voters with a flexible, low-cost option to participate in national and local elections.
While the expansion of vote-by-mail systems during the 2020 pandemic increased overall voter turnout, it also intensified political debate over election administration and security measures.
Although empirical data show that voter fraud in mail-in systems remains extremely rare, legal and political challenges, such as federal lawsuits targeting state mail-in procedures, continue to shape the discussion surrounding electoral access.
The ongoing debates over vote-by-mail illustrate a continuing effort to balance security with public access in the U.S. election system. As states enact laws to regulate, expand, or limit mail ballot procedures, the future of mail-in voting will remain a central topic in discussions about democratic participation and legal policy.
Login
