DOJ Voter Roll Bid Dismissed
Federal Judge Dismisses DOJ Bid to Compel Maryland's Voter Rolls Under Civil Rights Act
Key Points
Judge Gallagher found that Maryland's statewide voter registration list is not a record the Civil Rights Act can compel a state to produce, noting the list is generated by the state and not in an officer's possession for production.
The court dismissed the Maryland case with prejudice, meaning the DOJ cannot refile this specific CRA claim against Maryland.
Gallagher criticized and rejected the Justice Department's attempt to rely on a Office of Legal Counsel memo asserting CRA authority to compel disclosure of voter rolls.
The ruling came five days before Maryland's gubernatorial primary election, highlighting timing as the case unfolded.
Nationwide context shows the DOJ has a 0-9 record across roughly 31 lawsuits, with at least 16 states voluntarily providing voter files to the DOJ.
A federal judge has dismissed the Trump administration's bid to force Maryland to hand over its full, unredacted statewide voter registration list, dealing another courtroom loss to the Department of Justice. U.S. District Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher — a Trump appointee — ruled that Maryland's voter rolls are not records the Civil Rights Act of 1960 can compel a state to produce, according to WBAL-TV.
The ruling came five days before Maryland's gubernatorial primary election on July 19, 2022. It is the ninth consecutive defeat for the DOJ in these cases, New Republic reported. Out of roughly 31 lawsuits filed, the DOJ has yet to win a single contested court ruling.
Judge Rejects DOJ's Reading of a 60-Year-Old Law
The Civil Rights Act of 1960 requires election officers to preserve and produce certain "records and papers" tied to voting. The DOJ argued this language covers Maryland's entire statewide digital voter database — roughly 4.1 million voter records. Judge Gallagher disagreed. She found that the statewide list is generated by the state itself and is not a record "in the possession" of any officer that must be handed over, according to WMAR2 News.
Gallagher dismissed the case with prejudice. That means the DOJ cannot refile this same Civil Rights Act claim against Maryland ever again. She also criticized and rejected a Justice Department internal legal memo — called an Office of Legal Counsel opinion — that the DOJ had used to justify its demand. Internal legal opinions, she wrote, do not carry the force of law, New Republic reported.
DOJ Goes 0-9 in a Nationwide Push for Voter Data
The Maryland case is not isolated. The DOJ filed roughly 31 similar lawsuits or requests across the country since 2021, seeking statewide voter files it says it needs to check for civil rights violations. Courts have blocked the effort every time states pushed back. The DOJ's record in contested cases now stands at 0-9, according to New Republic.
Not every state fought the request. At least 16 states voluntarily handed over some version of their voter files to avoid costly litigation, Yahoo News reported. But where states refused, judges across the country have consistently sided with the states — calling the DOJ's legal theory unsupported by the statute's text.
Privacy and States' Rights at the Heart of the Fight
Maryland officials framed their win as a victory for voter privacy. The state argued that handing over unredacted rolls — which include partial Social Security numbers and dates of birth — posed a serious cybersecurity risk. Maryland election administrator Linda Lamone said no specific investigative cause had been shown to justify the sweeping request, according to WBAL-TV.
Critics of the DOJ effort also argued the push was really about building a centralized national voter database — something Congress never authorized. Election law experts noted that the 1960 Civil Rights Act was designed to let the government inspect physical ballots and registration cards in the Jim Crow South, not compel the creation of a modern national digital file, The Kenyata Times reported.
What Comes Next for the DOJ's Election Data Strategy
The string of losses puts the DOJ's strategy in question. Legal analysts suggest the department may shift toward using the Voting Rights Act instead of the 1960 Civil Rights Act in future cases. The Voting Rights Act sets a higher bar — requiring evidence of discrimination — but it offers broader legal tools for discovery, according to New Republic.
For now, the rulings effectively block any court-ordered national voter database. Experts say that if the federal government wants that kind of access, Congress would need to pass new legislation. The Maryland dismissal, with its with-prejudice ruling, sets a strong persuasive example for other district courts still handling similar DOJ cases, WMAR2 News reported.
Sentiment
Mostly NegativePublishers
11
Articles
5
Reach
16
