The Justice Department is urging a federal judge to consider whether to hold an immigrant rights group in contempt of court for disclosing the results of its analysis of a dataset of alleged noncitizens registered to vote in California WASHINGTON -- The Justice Department on Sunday defended the accuracy of a list of what it says are more than 20,000 suspected noncitizens registered to vote in California and suggested that a federal judge consider whether an immigrant rights group and its lawyers should face contempt charges after they published an analysis of the names.

On Friday, U.S. District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg allowed the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA, access to federal government data on 20,000 people the Trump administration alleges are noncitizen voters in California. Boasberg, based in Washington, D.C., ordered the plaintiffs not to disclose any names on the list and use the data only for their arguments about why they have legal standing to challenge the Trump administration's use of it.

On Saturday, attorneys for the immigrant rights group filed court papers revealing that their analysis found more than 40% of the people on the list do not appear in the state's voter file. It also identified 22 people on the list who were likely naturalized U.S. citizens while saying that thousands more U.S. citizens appeared to be on it, as well.

The Justice Department said in a filing Sunday that the analysis by the immigrant rights group had nothing to do with the group's legal standing and therefore violated Boasberg's order.

“The report’s political grandstanding about alleged inaccuracies that purportedly impact California voters generally, or comparisons between the government’s list and the full ‘California voter file,’ has no relevance to whether the particular plaintiffs in this case have standing,” it said.

The filing also suggested Boasberg refer the matter to the Justice Department for investigation for possible criminal contempt of court.

Alberto Lammers, a spokesman for the University of California, Los Angeles' Voting Rights Project, which filed the case and did the data analysis for the immigrant rights group, said in an emailed statement: “Plaintiffs’ counsel and their experts fully complied with the Court’s orders.”In a separate case, the Justice Department on Sunday also appealed a decision from Friday night by U.S. District Court Judge Trina L. Thompson. The ruling by the San Francisco-based judge barred the department from demanding that election offices remove possible noncitizens from voter rolls, separate their ballots or threaten legal action. The Justice Department has noted that Thompson ruled before the federal government was able to file its initial arguments.

That case is one of many the Trump administration has lost in its battle over its lists of alleged noncitizen voters. A federal judge in California rejected its demand that election officials there be forced to separate ballots cast by those voters, writing that such last-minute orders could “wreak havoc” on the state's election. Two appellate judges agreed.

California election officials also contend the list is riddled with errors and say they have no way to do the painstaking work required by law to remove voters from the rolls in the days before the election. People attest to being U.S. citizens when they to vote and risk felony prosecution if they cast a ballot when they are not eligible.

The administration has said its list was carefully compiled from the state's own voter registration data and compared to federal citizenship records. The Justice Department issued a series of subpoenas for election offices in California and warned election officials who knowingly let noncitizens vote that they could face criminal charges.