California Nurses Association v. Mullin
Overview
Overview
A preliminary injunction halting federal elections-related field operations in nine states through Election Day. Nurses' unions, two California local governments, and the Voto Latino Foundation challenged the Department of Homeland Security's "Unlawful Voter Initiative" and "Surge Initiative," under which ICE and Homeland Security Investigations agents were directed to question and investigate people suspected of noncitizen voting. A federal judge in the Northern District of California found the plan likely violated the Voting Rights Act's ban on voter intimidation and blocked it in the nine targeted states until polls close on November 3, 2026.
The Facts
The Facts
In June 2026 the DHS General Counsel ordered ICE to pursue stricter penalties, including deportation, against noncitizens believed to have improperly registered or voted. In August 2026 DHS launched the "Unlawful Voter Initiative," directing U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to generate target lists and coordinate with HSI field offices. On August 31 DHS issued "Surge Initiative Guidance" directing agents to prioritize field investigations into voter eligibility in nine states: California, Connecticut, Georgia, Missouri, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, Washington, and Wisconsin. The plan drew on USCIS target lists and TECS records generated from a "Voter Eligibility Matching Policy." On September 14, 2026, Senators Chuck Schumer and Alex Padilla released a whistleblower disclosure detailing the trainings and source data behind the initiative.
The Issue
Issue
Whether the plaintiffs were likely to succeed in showing that the DHS field-operations initiative amounted to unlawful voter intimidation, and whether a preliminary injunction should issue to block the operations in the nine targeted states before the November 3, 2026 election.
The Rules
Rule
Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 52 U.S.C. section 10307(b), prohibits intimidating, threatening, or coercing any person for voting, attempting to vote, or urging or aiding another to vote. A preliminary injunction requires the moving party to show a likelihood of success on the merits, a likelihood of irreparable harm absent relief, that the balance of equities tips in its favor, and that an injunction serves the public interest. An organization has associational standing to sue on behalf of its members when the members would have standing, the interests are germane to the organization's purpose, and neither the claim nor the relief requires individual members' participation.
The Application
Analysis
The court held that the California Nurses Association and National Nurses United had associational standing to press a Section 11(b) claim for intimidation affecting voter assistance and mobilization, pointing to members who said they would stop serving as poll monitors or doing voter-outreach work out of fear of the operations. The court found those harms to voter-engagement efforts irreparable and not compensable by money, and concluded the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on that Voting Rights Act claim. Because that claim supported the relief sought, the court did not reach the plaintiffs' other voter-intimidation theories or their Administrative Procedure Act claims.
The Conclusion
Conclusion
Judge Martinez-Olguin granted the preliminary injunction on October 21, 2026, barring DHS, ICE, and those acting with them from conducting elections-related field operations and interviews in the nine states against people they know, suspect, or should reasonably know or suspect are U.S. citizens, and from running such operations based wholly on TECS records from the Voter Eligibility Matching Policy. The order runs until 8:00 p.m. on November 3, 2026, or when polls close on Election Day, and was stayed until 5:00 p.m. on October 23, 2026, with plaintiffs required to post a nominal $100 bond.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support