Voters in Grand Rapids, Michigan, cast their ballots during the state’s August 2024 primary. (Photo by Matt Vasilogambros/Stateline)
A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that the Justice Department does not have the authority to access the sensitive personal information of Michigan voters. This is a setback for President Donald Trump’s efforts to assert power over state elections.
The decision moves the country closer to a potential U.S. Supreme Court fight over states’ voter rolls ahead of November’s midterm elections, with Michigan at the center.
The Trump administration has sued 30 states for copies of their voter information. Federal officials plan to run the data through a Department of Homeland Security computer program to identify possible noncitizen voters.
In a 2:1 decisionA three-judge panel of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals found that Democratic Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson is not required to release sensitive voter information, including voters’ birth dates, driver’s licenses and Social Security numbers. The 6th Circuit is the first appellate court to weigh in on voter lawsuits following a series of district court rulings against the DOJ.
The Justice Department had requested access to Michigan’s voter rolls under the Civil Rights Act of 1960, which grants the U.S. attorney general broad access to documents and records that come into the “possession” of election officials. Congress passed the law to allow investigations into voting discrimination against black citizens.
The lower court confirmed
Wednesday’s statement confirmed a Decision in February by U.S. District Court Judge Hala Jarbou, a Trump appointee in the Western District of Michigan, who ruled that the Justice Department was not entitled to voter data. Michigan’s voter registration database is a record created by state officials, not a document that came into their possession, she argued.
The appeals judges agreed, writing that subjecting the state’s entire voter roll to the Civil Rights Act would put Michigan officials on a “collision course” with the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act, two federal laws that require states to maintain and update voter registration lists.
The Civil Rights Act “directs election officials to preserve and preserve certain records and papers that come into their possession, and the NVRA and HAVA require election officials to remove ineligible voters from statewide voter registration lists,” Judge Andre B. Mathis, a nominee of President Joe Biden, wrote in the majority opinion.
“We should not adopt a reading that would result in election officials violating a federal law because they are trying to comply with another,” Mathis added.
An appeals panel member, Judge John B. Nalbandian, a Trump appointee, wrote in a dissent that Michigan’s voter roll was a record that the Justice Department could demand under the Civil Rights Act. He argued that requiring Michigan to release the data would not conflict with NVRA and HAVA.
DOJ sees “carveout”
While oral arguments in MayThe Justice Department noted that upholding the district court’s decision would weaken its ability to investigate racial discrimination in elections. DOJ attorney David Goldman told the panel that the district court judge created a “carveout” in the Civil Rights Act that was not written into the law.
But Michigan Assistant Attorney General Heather Meingast, who represents Benson, told the justices that the Justice Department’s request was unprecedented and not supported by federal law.
“It doesn’t seem to meet the test of what the (Civil Rights Act) was talking about in the ’60s,” Meingast said. “And the purpose was for voters to turn in their documents, their applications and their poll taxes.”
The Justice Department has been investigating state voter rolls for more than a year. While some Republican-led states volunteered the data, most states resisted, leading to a wave of lawsuits. To date, no court has ruled in favor of the DOJ.
Justice Department lawyers said the voter information would be shared with the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) — a computer program that originally checked individual immigrants’ eligibility for government benefits and was repurposed by the Trump administration into a citizenship verification tool.
On Monday, a federal judge in Washington, DC, ruled that the changes to SAVE were made unlawfully and that the Trump administration did them violates privacy by millions of Americans. The judge also noted that problems had been identified at SAVE, including the mislabeling of citizens.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. DOJ lawyers can ask the full 6th Circuit or the Supreme Court to hear the case.
The Michigan Department of State and the Michigan Department of Attorney General also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
