Bennett would deny DOJ's request even if jurisdiction existed
Mark J. BennettNinth Circuit judge, separate concurrence
Bennett joins the order dismissing DOJ's appeal and says that, even if the court had jurisdiction, he would deny DOJ's emergency motion on the merits for several reasons.
“Even if I were to conclude we had jurisdiction over the appeal, and reach the merits, there are several reasons why I would deny the United States’s emergency motion for injunctive relief pending appeal.”
Original text
Where this statement fits
DOJ seeks to set aside flagged California ballots; Weber disputes its evidence
DOJ seeks to segregate certain California mail ballots and prevent their federal-election tabulation until citizenship is verified. It identifies more than 20,000 registrants as likely noncitizens. Shirley Weber disputes the evidence, deadline and legality of the demand.
Source and context
Original text
About this source
Published order of the Ninth Circuit panel granting Los Angeles County's motion to dismiss the United States' appeal for lack of jurisdiction and denying the emergency motion as moot, with concurrences by Judges Bennett and Sanchez and a dissent by Judge Bumatay. The order sets out the district court proceedings from October 15 to October 22.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Bennett fully concurs in the per curiam order dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and writes separately in light of the dissent.
After the quotation
Bennett notes that, because of time constraints, he does not address every merits issue and focuses on several he believes are dispositive. He then summarizes the United States' allegations against California and Los Angeles County.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
The case's reference point is DOJ's request to set aside and verify flagged California mail ballots. Bennett says that even if the court had jurisdiction and reached the merits, there are several reasons he would deny DOJ's emergency motion, which rejects the request.
- Recorded on
- Published here
More from this case
Read the full caseTrump says the judge should not have ruled against the ballot request
“California is very corrupt. The elections are extremely corrupt. The judge should not have done that but we'll appeal that, of course”Read statement
Newsom calls the ballot lawsuit an attack on the rule of law
“For more than a year, California’s sovereignty has been under siege, and this lawsuit is his latest attack on the rule of law, the California Constitution, and the U.S. Constitution”Read statement
Bonta says unreliable noncitizenship claims cannot justify disrupting the election
“No administration can disenfranchise thousands of individuals or disrupt an ongoing election based on highly unreliable claims of noncitizenship”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Bennett would deny DOJ's request even if jurisdiction existed
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/7058-bennett-joins-the-order-dismissing-doj-s-appeal
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Bennett would deny DOJ's request even if jurisdiction existed". First published: 2026-10-28. Last updated: 2026-10-28. https://disputeindex.com/events/7058-bennett-joins-the-order-dismissing-doj-s-appeal