On Monday, a federal judge in Oregon dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Justice Department that sought the unredacted voter rolls from the state. U.S. District Judge Mustafa Kasubhai announced his decision during a hearing, stating that the federal government had failed to meet the legal requirements necessary for obtaining such records. This ruling marks a notable setback for President Donald Trump’s administration, which has been pursuing detailed voter data across various states.
Oregon's Attorney General, Dan Rayfield, expressed approval of the court’s decision, emphasizing that it underscores the protection of citizens' personal information. He stated that “Oregonians deserve to know that voting laws can’t be used as a backdoor to grab their personal information.” The Justice Department, however, declined to comment on the ruling.
This hearing was convened following a letter from U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, dated on the same day that federal immigration agents were involved in a fatal incident in Minneapolis. In her correspondence, Bondi requested the governor’s support for federal immigration officers and outlined steps to enhance law enforcement, which included granting the Justice Department access to voter rolls in order to verify the compliance of Minnesota's voter registration practices with federal law.
Additionally, Bondi requested access to records from Minnesota’s Medicaid and food assistance programs while urging the repeal of sanctuary policies that restrict local cooperation with federal immigration authorities. The Justice Department’s requests have included comprehensive data such as names, dates of birth, residential addresses, driver’s license numbers, and partial Social Security numbers. Many states have raised concerns that complying with these requests would violate both federal and state privacy laws.
As part of its broader actions, the Justice Department has pursued lawsuits against at least 23 states and the District of Columbia to obtain similar voter data. Recently, a federal judge in Georgia dismissed such a suit, ruling that the government had initiated it in the incorrect jurisdiction. Likewise, a judge in California ruled earlier in the month that the government's request was "unprecedented and illegal." The Justice Department argues that access to detailed voter data is necessary to ensure that election officials adhere to federal election laws.
In July, the Justice Department formally requested an electronic copy of Oregon’s statewide voter registration list, along with specifics on how the state removes ineligible voters. An additional request in August again sought the voter list, emphasizing its need for assessing compliance with federal law and including sensitive personal data. Oregon officials countered that the department lacked the authority to demand the full list, instead offering publicly available information.
During the hearing, Judge Kasubhai indicated that the Justice Department's August letter did not fulfill the legal requirement of stating the basis and purpose of their request, as stipulated in the Civil Rights Act of 1960. He reviewed congressional records from that era and noted that the requirement for the release of records was meant to be connected to investigations into election discrimination, suggesting that the current request did not align with that intention.
Concerns have arisen among election officials about the Justice Department's outreach, as the agency does not possess constitutional authority to oversee elections; this power resides with the states and Congress. Additionally, federal law provides protections against the sharing of individual voter data with the federal government, raising further challenges to the department's pursuits.
