The assistant federal prosecutor of Los Angeles, Bill Essayli, has been at the center of a new electoral controversy after publicly announcing that he is investigating possible cases of fraud in the California primary elections, even though the vote counting and certification process has not been completed, reported the Los Angeles Times.

In recent days, Essayli assured that his office is maintaining “several investigations into electoral fraud” in coordination with the FBI and even invited citizens to send evidence directly to federal authorities. He also said he plans to file criminal charges once the state certifies the results.

However, his statements have drawn criticism from experts and former Department of Justice (DOJ) officials, who maintain that these actions contradict federal rules designed to prevent interference in ongoing electoral processes.

They question investigations during the vote counting

The Justice Manual states that federal prosecutors must avoid visible investigative actions related to alleged electoral fraud until the election has concluded, the results are certified, and any potential recounts or challenges are resolved.

The rule seeks to prevent premature investigations from affecting public trust or interfering with electoral participation.

Despite this, Essayli has maintained in interviews with conservative media that California has “significant vulnerabilities” in its electoral system and has insisted on the need to audit the state registry.

"We believe it has significant vulnerabilities. We believe that California does not have sufficient safeguards to ensure that only eligible American citizens vote in California elections, and that is why we have been demanding an audit of California's voter rolls," he said in an interview with One America News Network, where he also dared to say that he was "prohibited from talking about ongoing investigations," but that "voter fraud is not a theory," but rather "a real thing."

Experts reject accusations without evidence

Although Essayli himself has acknowledged that he has no evidence of widespread fraud capable of altering the electoral results, his statements have been used by conservative sectors to reinforce questions about the integrity of the Californian electoral system.

Electoral law professor Justin Levitt, former White House advisor during the Biden administration, described the official's strategy as an unusual practice in an interview with the media outlet.

“The ethic of a federal prosecutor should be to never become news and never allow their work to influence the elections they investigate,” he said.

For his part, Democratic Senator Adam Schiff, a former federal prosecutor in Los Angeles, accused Essayli of seeking cases to support a political narrative pushed by President Donald Trump.

A debate that points to the midterm elections

The investigations occur in a context of growing polarization over electoral integrity in the country. While Republicans maintain that there are structural flaws that facilitate irregularities, electoral officials and specialists affirm that the cases of fraud detected have been isolated and without significant impact on the results.

California election authorities have defended their vote verification, auditing and counting procedures, ensuring that rigorous controls are in place to ensure safe and accurate elections.

As the investigations announced by Essayli progress, the debate on electoral fraud once again occupies a central place on the political agenda.