Trump Action Archive

Supporting reports

• Federal judge in Rhode Island dismisses DOJ lawsuit seeking voter records — A federal judge in Rhode Island dismissed the Department of Justice's lawsuit seeking to obtain sensitive records on every voter in the state. The ruling came after an unfavorable hearing for the government. This marks the fifth consecutive case in which the Trump administration's DOJ has lost its attempt to compel states to surrender voter data, with the administration having sued 30 states total on this issue.
• DOJ falsely claimed compliance with Privacy Act in voter roll complaints — The DOJ's complaints assert that the agency has complied with the 1974 Privacy Act, but the DOJ has not yet filed a Statement of Records Notice explaining how it will use the voter data it is demanding, as required by the Privacy Act. Legal experts characterize this as a premature assertion of an affirmative defense and a significant unforced error.
• DOJ filed California voter roll lawsuit in wrong federal court — The DOJ filed its California voter roll case in the Central District of Los Angeles rather than the Eastern District covering Sacramento, where the state capital and all voter registration files are located. This procedural error represents one of several mistakes in the DOJ's complaints that legal experts characterize as significant flaws in the litigation.
• DOJ files four new lawsuits demanding unredacted voter rolls from states — The U.S. Department of Justice filed four new lawsuits last week seeking unredacted voter rolls from states, bringing the total number of similar actions to 18 states, predominantly led by Democrats. The DOJ claims the lawsuits aim to ensure states are removing ineligible voters and to run rolls through Department of Homeland Security databases. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon announced Georgia, a GOP-led state, will also be sued, framing voter roll maintenance as "a bipartisan problem." Election experts question whether the stated purpose reflects the full scope of the DOJ's intentions.
• DOJ seeks memoranda granting unprecedented power over state list maintenance — Along with demand letters, the DOJ has asked states to sign memoranda that would grant the agency unprecedented power to conduct list maintenance and order states to conduct it in particular ways—not merely requiring general reasonable maintenance programs but directing specific voter removals by name. Legal experts argue the DOJ lacks statutory authority to take such power from states, and Congress has not authorized such delegation.
• DOJ shifts legal strategy from NVRA/HAVA to Civil Rights Act claims — The December lawsuits filed by the DOJ employ a different legal strategy than the September filings, dropping claims based on the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and Help America Votes Act (HAVA) and instead arguing that Title III of the 1960 Civil Rights Act (CRA) empowers the attorney general to demand unredacted voter data. Legal experts note this shift suggests recognition that the earlier statutory claims were weak, and that the CRA's inspection provisions do not authorize production of unredacted records.
• Judge Carter denies DOJ motion for production of voter records in California — In the California voter roll case, Judge David O. Carter, a Bill Clinton appointee, denied the DOJ's motion for an order to produce records in a short order that did not elaborate on his reasoning. The DOJ had filed the motion days before a scheduled hearing, and California responded with an emergency ex parte application arguing the demand was both rushed and improper.