DOJ Seeks Stay to Resume Voter Data Collection After Court Block

Key points

• DOJ filed a motion on October 17 to stay the October 9 ruling by Judge Sparkle Sooknanan, which halted the 'DOJ Voter List Maintenance Policy.'
• The DOJ claims its requests for state voter data were voluntary, arguing they do not constitute 'final agency actions' reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act.
• Judge Sooknanan ruled the requests were mandatory due to threats of legal consequences, noting the DOJ had already sued 30 states and D.C. for non-compliance.
• The DOJ has lost 26 court cases regarding unredacted voter rolls, with zero wins, according to Democracy Docket.
• In California, the DOJ threatened election officials with criminal exposure if they do not purge voters identified as noncitizens, a move rejected by state officials.

Background

This dispute follows a September 25 Supreme Court ruling that allowed the expanded use of the SAVE database for voter audits, reversing lower court injunctions. Earlier in October, the DOJ sued California to block mail ballots from 20,000 voters identified as likely noncitizens, a demand rejected by state officials. The current legal battle is part of a broader federal effort to influence the November midterms, which has included demands for voter data and citizenship verification mandates.

How outlets are covering it

Democracy Docket emphasizes the DOJ's legal strategy to bypass the court block by recharacterizing its data requests as voluntary, highlighting the agency's 0-26 record in related lawsuits. The Atlantic focuses on the 'strong-arming' of states, noting that the Civil Rights Division has shifted its focus to obtaining sensitive voter information, a practice unprecedented for the agency. The Center for American Progress criticizes the 'flawed list-matching practices,' citing a DHS whistleblower who alleged agents impersonated voters to access state databases, and points to historical examples of inflated fraud claims, such as the 2011-2012 Republican efforts in Florida and Michigan. AP News reported on the broader lawsuit challenging the DHS effort to collect voter data, framing it as a significant legal challenge to federal election oversight.

Why it matters

The outcome of this legal battle could determine whether the DOJ can continue its nationwide campaign to collect and analyze voter roll data ahead of the November midterms. If the stay is granted, the DOJ may resume using the SAVE database, which critics argue is error-prone and risks disenfranchising eligible citizens. The dispute also highlights the tension between federal and state authority over election administration, with the DOJ's actions potentially undermining public trust in the integrity of the upcoming elections.

What to watch

The federal district court must decide whether to grant the DOJ's request for a stay pending appeal. If granted, the DOJ could resume collecting state voter roll data and using the SAVE database. The outcome will likely be influenced by the upcoming midterm elections, as the DOJ's efforts are seen as an attempt to influence the electoral landscape. State officials, particularly in California, are expected to continue resisting the DOJ's demands, citing data security and lack of verified evidence.