The U.S. Justice Department, under the Trump administration, has pursued demands for various types of state data, including comprehensive voter registration records and information related to public assistance programs like Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
These efforts have encountered significant resistance from a majority of states, including both Democratic and Republican-led administrations, which cite privacy laws and constitutional concerns.
The department's attempts have also faced multiple setbacks in federal courts.
Federal Demands and Stated Rationale
The Justice Department has initiated legal actions against 25 states, in addition to issuing direct requests, for access to state voter rolls. These demands often seek non-public information such as Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, full birth dates, and current addresses of registered voters.
The department asserts that it requires this data to assist states in "cleaning" their voter rolls, ensuring compliance with federal election laws, and identifying unlawfully registered non-citizen voters.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon has spearheaded these data demands.
Harmeet Dhillon has publicly dismissed state officials' concerns regarding the confidentiality of Social Security numbers as "silly."
Beyond voter data, Attorney General Pam Bondi specifically requested that Minnesota provide records related to Medicaid and SNAP, stating the aim was to "efficiently investigate fraud." This request aligned with the Trump administration's focus on alleged fraud within public assistance programs, particularly among immigrants of Somali descent in Minnesota.
In Minnesota, Bondi's request to Governor Tim Walz also included calls to eliminate "sanctuary" policies and enhance cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This involved suggestions such as providing agents with access to local jails and honoring detainment requests.
Bondi's letter to Governor Walz emphasized the need to "bring back law and order to Minnesota," occurring amidst escalating tensions related to ICE immigration enforcement in the state, including two shooting incidents involving federal officers that resulted in fatalities. The letter was dated the same day Alex Pretti, a U.S. citizen, was shot and killed by immigration officers in Minnesota. A Justice Department attorney stated the administration was "trying to enforce federal law."
Widespread State Resistance and Concerns
State officials across the political spectrum have largely resisted the Justice Department's demands.
Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon rejected the requests for voter and public aid data, citing state and federal privacy laws.
Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon characterized the letter as "deeply disturbing" and compared it to a "ransom note," arguing that the Governor lacks a formal role in election management.
Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes also likened a similar letter to "organized crime."
Resistance has come from Republican-led states as well. At least six Republican-led state election offices have refused to provide non-public voter data. West Virginia Secretary of State Kris Warner stated that his state would require payment for public voter rolls and would not provide personal information.
Other Republican election administrators provided some sensitive data but declined to sign a proposed agreement that would require states to remove voters deemed ineligible by the Justice Department within 45 days.
These officials expressed concerns that the requests conflicted with state laws, questioned the administration's motivations, and objected to the federal government taking the lead in voter removal, which is typically a state or local responsibility.
Mississippi Secretary of State Michael Watson, who provided data but refused to sign the agreement, emphasized that voter roll maintenance should remain a state-level responsibility. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has warned 10 states about potential legal issues if they agree to proposed federal scrutiny of their voter rolls, arguing that the suggested process could conflict with federal laws governing voter removal procedures. Separately, voter advocates have sued Nebraska to prevent the state from sharing personal voter information with the Justice Department.
Regarding public assistance data, Minnesota is one of over 20 states that has not complied with a U.S. Department of Agriculture demand for personal information of SNAP benefit applicants or recipients from the past six years.
Additionally, Minnesota was among 22 states that sued to prevent the Department of Health and Human Services from sharing sensitive Medicaid data with the Department of Homeland Security for immigration enforcement.
Legal Challenges and Court Outcomes
The Justice Department's legal arguments in pursuit of state voter data have faced significant challenges.
No court has upheld the department's assertion that it is entitled to registration records under the 1960 Civil Rights Act.
To date, federal judges in California, Oregon, and Georgia have dismissed similar lawsuits filed by the Justice Department. A federal judge in California dismissed the department's voter-roll lawsuit against that state, criticizing "unbridled consolidation of all elections power in the Executive without action from Congress and public debate." Another district judge overseeing a challenge to the administration's immigration tactics raised concerns about the Justice Department's demands potentially being linked to broader unrest.
In matters related to public assistance data, a federal judge in California has indicated that states are likely to succeed in their claim that the USDA's demand for SNAP data is unlawful.
However, a federal judge in California permitted limited sharing of Medicaid data, specifically addresses and immigration status, to proceed.
Data Verification Tools and Accuracy Concerns
The administration's increased involvement in voter list maintenance coincides with the promotion of the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlement (SAVE) system, a voluntary tool managed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Last year, a DHS division updated the SAVE tool, which traditionally verified immigration and citizenship status for government benefit applicants, to include access to Social Security and U.S. passport data. The Trump administration has encouraged states to upload voter files to this enhanced SAVE system to identify potential non-citizens on their voter rolls.
However, questions persist regarding the accuracy of the SAVE system and its potential impact on eligible voters.
For instance, Texas election officials identified 2,724 potential non-citizens after running over 18 million voters through the system. A detailed review in Travis County, Texas, found that 11 of 97 voters initially flagged as potential non-citizens had already provided proof of citizenship when registering. In another instance, at least 15 out of 84 flagged voters in a Texas county were identified as false positives. Concerns about the 45-day removal requirement in proposed agreements highlight the potential for errors and the typically state-level nature of voter removal processes.
Compliance Overview
A Justice Department lawyer indicated that only 14 states have fully complied with the data demands or are in the process of complying.
As of recent reports, only two states, Alaska and Texas, have signed the Justice Department's proposed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) outlining data sharing terms.
Approximately a dozen additional states are reportedly providing some data without entering into such an agreement.