Los Angeles County Clerk Refuses DOJ USB Request Over Privacy Rules

Los Angeles County officials said they will not connect a USB drive that the Department of Justice claims contains a list of noncitizens who were sent absentee ballots, citing strict data‑privacy and information‑security standards.

The request stems from a federal investigation into alleged voting irregularities involving noncitizen voters. According to the DOJ, the portable drive holds personal identifiers of individuals who received mail‑in ballots despite lacking citizenship status, prompting the agency to seek the data from local election administrators.

County Clerk Alex Johnson responded that plugging an unknown device into county systems would breach established protocols designed to protect sensitive voter information. He emphasized that the county’s cybersecurity policies prohibit the direct attachment of external media without thorough vetting, as such devices can introduce malware or expose confidential records.

Those policies are reinforced by state and federal privacy statutes, including the California Consumer Privacy Act and the Federal Election Assistance Act, which set clear boundaries for handling personal data. Past incidents in which unsecured USB drives led to data breaches have heightened officials’ caution, making the clerk’s refusal consistent with long‑standing safeguards.

The disagreement highlights a growing tension between federal investigative authority and local data‑protection obligations. Legal experts note that the DOJ could pursue a subpoena or court order to compel compliance, while the county may challenge any demand that it believes violates privacy law or endangers the integrity of its information systems.

Debates over noncitizen voting have become a flashpoint in national politics, with claims on both sides often lacking concrete evidence. While the DOJ’s request suggests it believes the data exists, no public verification of the drive’s contents has been provided, leaving the scope of the alleged irregularities unclear.

As the standoff continues, observers say the outcome could set a precedent for how election officials handle future data‑request disputes, balancing the need for thorough investigations with the imperative to safeguard voter privacy and system security.