Multi-Front Legal Effort by DOJ Faces Judicial Setbacks
A multi-front legal effort by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to obtain unredacted voter registration records from numerous states has met with a series of judicial setbacks, even as the department continues to file new lawsuits. The actions are part of a broader initiative by the Trump administration to increase federal oversight of election administration, citing concerns about voter fraud.
The DOJ's Litigation Campaign
The DOJ has filed lawsuits against at least 18 states and one Georgia county. The lawsuits seek complete, unredacted copies of voter registration lists, including driver's license numbers and partial Social Security numbers. The DOJ has stated in court filings that the purpose of these requests is to verify state compliance with federal laws concerning the maintenance of accurate voter rolls.
The targeted states are predominantly led by Democratic administrations and were won by President Trump's opponent in the 2020 election. The most recent states to be sued, announced on a Friday, include Colorado, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Nevada.
In a separate legal action, the DOJ has also sued Fulton County, Georgia, seeking to compel local election officials to release all ballots and associated records from the 2020 election. Fulton County has been cited in claims by former President Trump and his allies regarding alleged irregularities in the 2020 election.
"At this Department of Justice, we will not permit states to jeopardize the integrity and effectiveness of elections by refusing to abide by our federal elections laws." — Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon
Dhillon has also referenced the processing of voter records through a citizenship lookup tool operated by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Judicial Rulings Against the DOJ
Several federal courts have ruled against the DOJ in these cases.
Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals: A three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court ruling dismissing a DOJ lawsuit against Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson. The court held that the voter file is not covered under Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 because the state created and maintained the file. This was the DOJ's first appellate loss in ten decisions concerning voter roll lawsuits. Circuit Judge John B. Nalbandian dissented from the majority opinion.
Central District of California: U.S. District Judge David O. Carter dismissed a lawsuit seeking California's voter rolls. Judge Carter ruled that the DOJ's request was "unprecedented and illegal," asserting that it aimed to "abridge the right of many Americans to cast their ballots." He stated that centralizing voter information could deter voter registration due to privacy concerns. Judge Carter also characterized the DOJ's lawsuit as a "fishing expedition."
District of Oregon: A district judge in Oregon has indicated a similar intent to dismiss a related case.
Data Sharing with the Department of Homeland Security
The DOJ confirmed in a federal court hearing in Rhode Island that it intends to share voter registration data obtained from states with DHS. This data exchange is planned to facilitate U.S. citizenship verification through a DHS system known as SAVE.
Last year, the Trump administration modified the SAVE system to function as a citizenship lookup tool, using a person's name, date of birth, and Social Security number. Federal officials have encouraged states to process their voter rolls through the system to identify potential noncitizens. Some states, including Texas and Louisiana, have used the system, reporting small numbers of potential noncitizens on their rolls. However, some U.S. citizens have been incorrectly flagged by SAVE.
State Responses and Related Events
Officials in several states have expressed opposition to the administration's pursuit of voter data. Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, a Democrat, stated, "We will not hand over Coloradans' sensitive voting information to Donald Trump. He does not have a legal right to the information."
In a related development, former President Trump announced on social media a pardon for Tina Peters, a former Colorado county clerk. Peters is serving a nine-year sentence after a conviction for unauthorized access to voting equipment during an effort to investigate the 2020 election. Presidential pardons apply to federal offenses; Peters was convicted on state charges, and the authority to pardon state crimes rests with Colorado's governor.
Separately, the DOJ recently announced a review of Colorado's prison system.