跟进：第九巡回法院2比1驳回司法部紧急上诉：加州逾2万张邮寄选票隔离请求被拒，案件回地区法院

旧金山 — 美国联邦第九巡回上诉法院（9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals）10月26日以2比1驳回美国司法部（DOJ）的紧急上诉，拒绝下令加利福尼亚州隔离逾2万名被联邦政府指为「可能不是公民」的登记选民所投邮寄选票；案件被送回联邦地区法院，地区法院定于10月27日（周二）举行听证，距11月3日中期选举日还有一周。

三名法官组成的上诉庭于10月25日（周日）通过 Zoom 举行罕见的紧急听证后作出上述裁定。由总统特朗普任命的法官马克·贝内特（Mark Bennett）与由前总统拜登任命的法官加布里埃尔·桑切斯（Gabriel Sanchez）组成多数意见，认定在地区法院尚未就司法部的诉讼作出裁决之前，上诉法院无权审理这项上诉。多数意见写道：「美国政府所声称的紧急状态，至少有一部分是其自己造成的。」意见指出，延误至少部分归因于美国政府自身起诉过迟、迟迟才意识到加州现行州法管辖选票的签发与处理、才认识到加州有数百万登记选民并按相应规模处理选票，以及向法院表达其所求救济的时间过晚。

贝内特法官同时表示，即便上诉法院有管辖权、并审理实体问题，他也会驳回司法部的紧急禁令请求，理由包括：司法部所援引的将非公民投票定为犯罪的联邦法律，并不优先于美国宪法《选举条款》（Elections Clause）赋予州的权限。桑切斯法官写道，所请求的禁令「将改变一场已经在进行中的选举的加州选举规则，造成选民与选举官员的广泛混乱，分散选举管理资源，并『引来选举混乱』」。同为特朗普任命的第三名法官帕特里克·布马泰（Patrick Bumatay）持异议，写道「加州的行为必须被联邦法律优先取代」，并表示他会批准司法部的请求。

本案源于司法部10月15日在洛杉矶联邦地区法院提起的诉讼：司法部要求法院下令加州将名单上逾2万人的邮寄选票单独隔离、在核实其公民身份前不予计入。司法部官员10月19日称，这2万多人中包括28名已被控非法投票的人。地区法官戴维·卡特（David Carter）上周未在司法部要求的时间内作出裁决，并把听证定在10月27日，司法部遂以地区法院未裁决构成变相驳回为由，向第九巡回法院提出紧急上诉。据 CNN 报道，地区法院听证定于10月27日美东时间下午4时举行。

加州州务卿雪莉·韦伯（Shirley Weber）的律师在10月20日的法庭文件中称，这起诉讼「往好里说是一场鲁莽的政治作秀，往坏里说会威胁到本次选举中数千名加州人的投票权」，并称司法部的主张依赖「可疑数据」。洛杉矶县登记注册官在上周的法庭文件中称，对联邦名单样本的初步核查发现，约四分之一的人表示自己出生在美国。据路透社统计，司法部已就拒绝提供完整选民名单一事起诉30个州及华盛顿特区，迄今输掉26起、未赢一起。

第九巡回法院的裁定把案件送回地区法院，由卡特法官继续审理司法部的禁令请求。司法部仍可进一步向美国最高法院上诉；按分工，负责第九巡回法院紧急事务的是最高法院大法官埃琳娜·卡根（Elena Kagan）。

关联：跟进：第九巡回法官质疑司法部加州选票隔离诉讼：称所求禁令与宪法《选举条款》相冲突

Follow-Up: 9th Circuit Rejects DOJ Emergency Appeal 2-1 Over 20,000 California Mail Ballots, Sending Case Back to District Court

SAN FRANCISCO — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on October 26 rejected, by a 2-1 vote, the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) emergency appeal seeking an order forcing California to set aside mail ballots cast by more than 20,000 registered voters the federal government alleges are likely noncitizens. The case returns to the U.S. District Court, where a hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, October 27, one week before the November 3 midterm elections.

The three-judge panel ruled after an unusual emergency hearing held by Zoom on Sunday, October 25. Judge Mark Bennett, an appointee of President Donald Trump, and Judge Gabriel Sanchez, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, formed the majority, holding that the appeals court did not have the authority to rule on the DOJ lawsuit before the district court had addressed the matter. "The United States's claimed emergency, at least in part, is a self-constructed one," the majority wrote, adding that at least part of the delay was attributable to the government's own delay in filing suit, in realizing that existing California state law governs the issuance and processing of ballots, in recognizing that California has millions of registered voters and processes ballots on a schedule aligned with that scale, and in communicating its desired relief to the court.

Bennett added that even if the panel had jurisdiction and reached the merits, he would deny the DOJ's emergency motion for several reasons, including that the federal law criminalizing voting by noncitizens cited by the administration does not preempt the state's authority under the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Sanchez wrote that the proposed injunction "would transform California's election rules for an election that is already underway and would cause widespread confusion among voters and election officials, divert election administration resources, and 'usher in electoral chaos.'" Judge Patrick Bumatay, also a Trump appointee, dissented, writing that "California's actions must be preempted" and saying he would have granted the DOJ's request.

The case began with a DOJ lawsuit filed on October 15 in federal court in Los Angeles, which asked a judge to order California to separate any ballots received from people on the administration's list of more than 20,000 voters and not count them until their citizenship had been verified. DOJ officials said on October 19 that the list included 28 people who had been criminally charged with illegally voting. After District Judge David Carter did not rule last week on the timetable the DOJ demanded and scheduled a hearing for October 27, the DOJ appealed to the 9th Circuit, arguing the delay amounted to a denial. According to CNN, the district court hearing is set for 4 p.m. ET on October 27.

Lawyers for California Secretary of State Shirley Weber said in an October 20 court filing that "at best, this litigation is a reckless political stunt" and "at worst, it threatens to disenfranchise thousands of Californians this election," and asserted that the DOJ's claims relied on "suspect data." Los Angeles County's registrar-recorder said in a court filing last week that an initial review of a sample of people on the federal list found that around 1 in 4 said they were born in the United States. According to Reuters, the DOJ has sued 30 states and Washington, D.C., for refusing to provide complete voter rolls, and has so far lost 26 of those cases without winning one.

The 9th Circuit's decision sends the case back to the district court, where Judge Carter will take up the DOJ's request for an order blocking the counting of the ballots. The DOJ could escalate further to the U.S. Supreme Court, where Justice Elena Kagan is the justice assigned to handle emergency appeals from the 9th Circuit.

Related: Follow-Up: 9th Circuit Judges Question DOJ Lawsuit to Set Aside California Mail Ballots, Citing Elections Clause

来源：GSM·美国（原文链接）

图片来源：图：位于旧金山第七街与 Mission 街交口的 James R. Browning 美国上诉法院大楼（资料照片），联邦第九巡回上诉法院总部所在地。Sanfranman59 摄，CC BY-SA 4.0，经 Wikimedia Commons 发布。 / The James R. Browning U.S. Court of Appeals Building at 7th and Mission Streets in San Francisco (file photo), headquarters of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Photo by Sanfranman59, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

本频道最新更多 ›

加州州立公园开放1.885亿美元公园拨款申请：单个项目最高850万美元，12月17日截止2026-10-26跟进：纽森回应第九巡回裁定：称驳回司法部选票上诉是「积极进展」2026-10-26

← 返回加州　全部新闻　关于我们