• DOJ will monitor six jurisdictions in Democratic states after GOP requests, sparking accusations of voter intimidation tactics.
• California’s Newsom says federal government has “no business” interfering since ballot contains only state constitutional amendment with no federal races.
• New Jersey AG calls deployment “highly inappropriate,” while DOJ insists it’s routine compliance monitoring under Civil Rights Division.

WASHINGTON (TDR) — The Department of Justice’s announcement Friday that it will send election monitors to California and New Jersey has ignited a fierce debate over federal interference in state elections, with Democratic officials accusing Attorney General Pam Bondi of weaponizing the DOJ to suppress votes in blue states.

Targeting Democratic Strongholds

The DOJ announced it will monitor polling sites in Passaic County, New Jersey, and five California counties—Los Angeles, Orange, Kern, Riverside, and Fresno—ahead of the November 4 elections. The decision came days after Republican parties in both states requested federal oversight.

“Transparency at the polls translates into faith in the electoral process, and this Department of Justice is committed to upholding the highest standards of election integrity,” Bondi said in a statement. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon added that the DOJ “will do everything necessary to protect the votes of eligible American citizens.”

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

But Democratic leaders aren’t buying it. California Governor Gavin Newsom‘s office fired back immediately: “This is not a federal election. The US DOJ has no business or basis to interfere with this election. This is solely about whether California amends our state Constitution.”

“Deploying these federal forces appears to be an intimidation tactic meant for one thing: Suppress the vote,” said Brandon Richards, Newsom’s spokesperson.

“Highly Inappropriate” Federal Overreach

New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin was equally blunt, calling the move “highly inappropriate” and saying the DOJ “has not even attempted to identify a legitimate basis for its actions.” He emphasized that the Constitution gives states—not the federal government—primary responsibility for running elections.

“We are committed to ensuring that every eligible voter is able to cast their ballot and make their voices heard,” Platkin said, adding that his office is “considering all of our options to prevent any effort to intimidate voters or interfere with our elections.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

Rusty Hicks, chair of the California Democratic Party, accused Republicans of outright “election interference,” saying “no amount of election interference by the California Republican Party is going to silence the voices of California voters.”

Rick Hasen, an election law professor at UCLA, called the DOJ’s move a “test run for 2026” in a social media post, suggesting the Trump administration is laying groundwork for midterm election interference.

The GOP’s Case for Monitoring

Republican parties in both states requested the monitoring citing specific concerns. California GOP Chairwoman Corrin Rankin wrote to Dhillon on Monday claiming “reports of irregularities in these counties that we fear will undermine either the willingness of voters to participate in the election or their confidence in the announced results.”

The California ballot features a redistricting proposition that could dramatically redraw congressional lines to add as many as five additional Democratic seats to the state’s U.S. House delegation. Republicans alleged issues including incorrect or duplicate ballots sent to voters and improper voter roll maintenance in Los Angeles and Orange counties.

In New Jersey, where Republican Jack Ciattarelli faces Democrat Mikie Sherrill in the gubernatorial race, the GOP cited Passaic County’s “long and sordid history” of vote-by-mail problems. In 2020, a judge ordered a new election for a Paterson city council seat after the apparent winner and others were charged with voter fraud.

Context: A Controversial DOJ Under Fire

The announcement comes as Bondi’s Justice Department faces mounting scrutiny for its direction under Trump. At a contentious Senate Judiciary Committee hearing two weeks ago, nearly 300 former DOJ employees released a letter warning that the administration was “taking a sledgehammer” to longstanding institutional norms.

Common Cause reported in June that Bondi removed the leadership team of the Voting Section and ordered dismissal of all active voting rights cases. The Voting Section enforces federal laws including the Voting Rights Act, National Voter Registration Act, and Help America Vote Act.

Under Bondi and Dhillon’s leadership, the Civil Rights Division has experienced mass departures of career attorneys. Democratic Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois accused Bondi of “fundamentally transform[ing] the Justice Department,” claiming the agency has become “a shield for the president and his political allies.”

Routine or Weaponized?

David Becker, a former DOJ attorney who has served as an election monitor, emphasized that monitoring work is typically done by department lawyers prohibited from interfering at polling places. Local jurisdictions normally agree to monitors’ presence.

However, Becker—now executive director of the Center for Election Integrity & Research—warned that if the administration tried to send monitors “without a clear legal rationale to a place where local officials didn’t want them, that could result in chaos.”

The DOJ’s statement noted that it “regularly deploys its staff to monitor for compliance with federal civil rights laws in elections in communities across the country”—a practice with a long history under both Democratic and Republican administrations. Last year, when the Biden administration was still in power, some Republican-led states refused to allow federal monitors access to voting locations.

But the timing and targeting raise questions. California’s ballot contains no federal races—only a state constitutional amendment. Los Angeles County Clerk Dean Logan said election observers are standard practice and that voters “can have confidence their ballot is handled securely and counted accurately.” Orange County Registrar Bob Page welcomed observers, noting it’s common to have local, state, federal, and even international monitors.

Trump has spent years falsely claiming the 2020 election was rigged and railing against mail-in voting despite numerous studies finding no evidence of widespread fraud. Democrats fear the administration is laying groundwork to challenge 2026 midterm results with unfounded fraud allegations.

Is DOJ election monitoring a legitimate safeguard for voting rights or a tool for political intimidation? Share your thoughts in the comments.

Follow The Dupree Report for more coverage of election integrity, DOJ controversies, and voting rights.

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10