Federal judges dismiss nearly all Trump administration lawsuits demanding unredacted state voter rolls
In 26 cases with final rulings, judges have thrown out Justice Department efforts to obtain confidential voter data, citing lack of legal and factual basis.
What happened
Since September 2025, the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division has sued 30 states and Washington, D.C., to obtain unredacted voter rolls, citing Trump's March 2025 executive order on election integrity. Of 26 completed cases, all 26 judges have dismissed the DOJ's complaints. The first seven lawsuits relied on federal election laws; judges ruled the government lacked legal authority under those statutes to compel states to produce voter rolls. The next 19 lawsuits invoked Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960, claiming it gave the attorney general broad power to obtain election records; judges rejected this, holding Title III applies only to voter registration documents and that the government failed to explain why it needed the records as the statute requires. Four cases remain pending, and the Trump administration has appealed most losses to federal appeals courts.
Context
Voter rolls contain confidential information on millions of Americans and have historically been managed by states. The administration's effort represents a push to take federal control over elections and prosecute alleged noncitizen voters. Multiple judges expressed concern that the administration was misusing federal law as a pretext to suppress voting and weaponize voter data. Judges noted a fundamental conflict: the DOJ claimed to enforce voting laws requiring continuous updates to voter lists, while Title III prohibits any alteration of election records. Among the 26 judges issuing rulings, eight were Trump appointees, four were appointed by George W. Bush, and 14 were appointed by Democrats.