Listen to the article
The U.S. Justice Department escalated its nationwide voter information collection effort Thursday by filing lawsuits against Wisconsin, Illinois, Georgia, and the District of Columbia for failing to turn over requested voter data to the Trump administration.
These legal actions bring the total number of such lawsuits to 22 as part of a broader campaign to gather detailed voting data and election information across the country. The effort has sparked concerns about voter privacy and data security among state officials from both political parties.
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger acknowledged the situation in a statement, saying, “We shared our nation-leading list maintenance practices and public voter roll data with the DOJ December 8 at their request, and we look forward to working together to eliminate the federal barriers that prevent even cleaner voter rolls.” He assured voters that the information was shared “strictly in accordance with state law that protect voters’ privacy.”
The case against Wisconsin follows the bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission’s vote against complying with the Justice Department’s request last week. Commissioners from both parties expressed concerns about the legality of providing voter roll information that contains sensitive personal data, including full names, dates of birth, residential addresses, and driver’s license numbers.
Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul criticized the lawsuit, suggesting the Justice Department was “chasing conspiracy theories” rather than “serving the interests of the American people.” Kaul defended his state’s electoral system, stating, “As has been demonstrated over and over and over again, Wisconsin’s elections are fair and conducted with integrity.”
Officials from the Illinois State Board of Elections declined to comment on the lawsuit.
According to an Associated Press tally, the Justice Department has requested voter registration rolls from at least 26 states in recent months. In many instances, federal officials have also sought information about how states maintain their voter rolls. Beyond the four states named in Thursday’s legal actions, the department has previously sued California, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.
Just last week, similar lawsuits were filed against Colorado, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Nevada, indicating a rapid acceleration of the campaign. The Justice Department noted that 10 states are either fully complying with the requests or working toward compliance.
The Trump administration has framed these lawsuits as part of a broader effort to ensure election security. Justice Department officials maintain that states refusing to provide voter lists and information about ineligible voters are violating federal law.
However, the initiative has triggered significant concerns among Democratic officials and civil rights advocates who question the intended use of this sensitive data and whether the department will adequately protect the information in accordance with privacy laws. The requested data typically includes personal identifying information such as names, dates of birth, residential addresses, driver’s license numbers, and in some cases, partial Social Security numbers.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon defended the lawsuits in a statement, saying, “The law is clear: states need to give us this information, so we can do our duty to protect American citizens from vote dilution. Today’s filings show that regardless of which party is in charge of a particular state, the Department of Justice will firmly stand on the side of election integrity and transparency.”
The Justice Department’s aggressive pursuit of voter data comes amid heightened national tensions around election administration and voting rights. Election security experts have pointed to the unprecedented scope of the data collection effort, raising questions about both its necessity and potential risks to voter privacy.
As the legal battles unfold, state officials must navigate the complex intersection of federal demands, state privacy laws, and their responsibility to protect sensitive voter information while maintaining election integrity.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
14 Comments
Interesting to see this legal action play out. Voter data is sensitive, so I hope the states and DOJ can find a solution that satisfies the government’s needs while upholding strong privacy protections.
Absolutely, maintaining voter trust is crucial. Any data sharing should be done transparently and with robust safeguards in place.
Voter data is a sensitive topic, so I hope the DOJ and states can find a collaborative solution that respects individual privacy while meeting legitimate information requirements.
Agreed, it’s a delicate balance. Transparency and mutual understanding will be key to resolving this in a way that maintains public trust.
Gathering voter data is a sensitive matter that requires careful handling. I hope the states and DOJ can find a way to meet information needs while fully protecting individual privacy.
Absolutely, voter trust is paramount. Any data sharing should be transparent and have robust safeguards in place.
Voter data is highly sensitive, so I’m glad to see the states pushing back to protect individual privacy. Hopefully the DOJ and states can find a collaborative solution.
This is a complex issue with valid concerns on both sides. I’m curious to see how the courts will balance the government’s data needs with the states’ duty to protect voter information.
Agreed, it’s a delicate balance. Transparency and mutual understanding will be crucial to resolving this in a way that maintains public trust.
This is a concerning development that could impact voter privacy and security. I hope the states and DOJ can work together to address legitimate data needs while fully protecting voters’ personal information.
Agreed, transparency and cooperation are important, but voter privacy must be the top priority. It’s a delicate balance that needs to be carefully navigated.
This legal action seems aimed at gathering detailed voter data across the country. While the government may have legitimate needs, voter privacy must be the top priority.
This is a complex issue with valid concerns on both sides. I’m curious to see how the courts will balance the government’s data needs with the states’ duty to protect voter privacy.
Voter privacy is paramount, so I hope the DOJ and states can work together to find a solution that satisfies legitimate information requirements while fully protecting individuals.