California Attorney General Babathi Banta is prohibited by a court order from cross-checking state voter rolls against federal databases to demand the removal of ineligible voters.
Posted by The John Phillips Show, Checked
- Sources
- 1 contradict5 context
- Said
- 1 time·
- Confidence
- 60%
The John Phillips ShowOct 17, 2026
The claim departs from the passage: the post says the federal government ('they') has been ordered by a court not to cross-check state voter rolls against its database, not that California Attorney General Babathi Banta is barred from doing so.
A played clip makes this claim. Listeners heard it, so it counts against the post.
This claim is about the present, so it is judged as of the day it was checked.
What was said
… to explain why the state of California does not want to open up a thumb drive sent by the feds alleging that 20,000 people who got a ballot should not be registered to vote because they are not citizens. Let's hear what Babathi has to say. That governs them. They've been ordered by a court to not cross-check state voter rolls against their database and then demand that states remove people from their voter rolls. Why? Well, because there are state laws, there are federal laws. Ashley asked him, Why don't you just read the list and then you can prove them wrong? But wait, it's a federal election. It's not just a state election. …
The John Phillips Show · · from the transcriptPost →What we found
Contradicts. The only court restriction in the sources limits CHIRLA's use of federal data on 20,000 people to its legal-standing arguments and bars disclosing names; it does not restrict California's Attorney General from cross-checking voter rolls.[1]
Context. The passage's 'they' refers to the federal government/DOJ side of the dispute, as the surrounding text about the federal database and the 'court case that they... may be violating' shows; the extracted claim reassigns the prohibition to the California AG.
Context. Appellate rulings rejected the Trump administration's bid to force California to set aside ballots or run citizenship checks, reflecting limits on federal demands rather than an order against the state AG cross-checking rolls.[2][3][4]
Context. Sources identify the California Attorney General as Rob Bonta, who opposed the federal demands, and none reports a court order barring him from cross-checking voter rolls.[5][6]
Sources
6 sources: 1 fact-checker, 1 primary, 1 tier 2, 3 not rated
- 1Justice Department urges sanctions for database analysis critical of its noncitizen voting claimsapnews.com · fact-checker · cited for: contradicts
- 2FILED - cdn.ca9.uscourts.govcdn.ca9.uscourts.gov · primary source · cited for: context
- 3Appeals Court Declines to Intervene in California Ballot Lawsuitnytimes.com · tier 2 · cited for: context
- 49th Circuit rejects bid to set aside 20,000 California ...sacbee.com · not rated · cited for: context
- 5Trump's DOJ gives California 48 hours to act on alleged ...yahoo.com · not rated · cited for: context
- 6Trump's DOJ gives California 48 hours to act on alleged noncitizen votersstar-telegram.com · not rated · cited for: context
Where this claim was made
Said in 1 published post
Related claims
- Gavin Newsom, the California Attorney General, and the California Secretary of State have obstructed efforts to clean up voter rolls.Can’t tell
- A federal judge in California ordered the Trump administration to suspend investigations in nine states regarding whether non-citizens are registered to vote.True
- There is an ongoing effort to prevent 20,000 non-citizens from voting in California.True
- The Trump administration sent a list of voters to California for removal from voter rolls.True
- The federal government sent a letter to California stating that 20,000 people on the voter rolls were likely ineligible to vote.True