Judge dismisses Trump administration lawsuit seeking California voter data

A federal judge Thursday dealt a significant legal setback to the Trump administration in its efforts to obtain voter data held by states.

In a 33-page order, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter in California dismissed a lawsuit that sought to give the Justice Department access to the Democratic-led state’s voter files, including records like Social Security numbers and driver’s license information.

California is one of 23 states, along with Washington, D.C., that the Justice Department has sued for refusing to hand over the voter data.

The lawsuit against California was filed in September.

“Clean voter rolls are the foundation of free and fair elections,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement at the time. “Every state has a responsibility to ensure that voter registration records are accurate, accessible, and secure — states that don’t fulfill that obligation will see this Department of Justice in court.”

The judge, a Clinton appointee, slammed those efforts in his ruling Thursday, writing that the administration's request “threatens the right to vote which is the cornerstone of American democracy.”

“The Department of Justice seeks to use civil rights legislation which was enacted for an entirely different purpose to amass and retain an unprecedented amount of confidential voter data," Carter wrote. "The centralization of this information by the federal government would have a chilling effect on voter registration which would inevitably lead to decreasing voter turnout as voters fear that their information is being used for some inappropriate or unlawful purpose.”

For Subscribers

FOR SUBSCRIBERSWhy baseball teams are replacing live stadium organists with modern music

FOR SUBSCRIBERSAnalysis: Trump promised $2 gas and cheaper groceries. Here’s what voters got.

FOR SUBSCRIBERSHe’s in the West Wing. He’s at the rally. He’s got Trump’s ear. Bill Pulte is everywhere.

FOR SUBSCRIBERSNew AI tool for voters offers a specialized chatbot to explain your ballot

FOR SUBSCRIBERSGOP retreats from North Carolina as Trump admits Democrats likely to win Senate seat

FOR SUBSCRIBERSNetflix’s latest cliff-hanger? Where it’s headed as a business

FOR SUBSCRIBERSOpenAI agents are shutting off ways to monitor misbehavior

FOR SUBSCRIBERSWhy John Turturro is having the best year of any New Yorker

FOR SUBSCRIBERSJames Talarico digs in with Black voters in pursuit of an elusive Democratic win in Texas

FOR SUBSCRIBERSRussian operatives likely spread fake videos targeting the Texas Senate race, researchers say

FOR SUBSCRIBERSRepublicans seek inroads with Black voters in Michigan’s tight Senate race

FOR SUBSCRIBERSEurope’s protests are about more than schools — they’re a generational roar

FOR SUBSCRIBERSTrump is desperate to bring gas prices down. The solution might be in India.

FOR SUBSCRIBERSInteractive map: How far do you live from the nearest data center?

FOR SUBSCRIBERSA decade ago, data centers overtook a rural community. It hasn’t been the same since.

Slide 1 of 1

The American Civil Liberties Union and other groups involved in the case praised the ruling in a joint statement.

For Subscribers

FOR SUBSCRIBERSWhy baseball teams are replacing live stadium organists with modern music

FOR SUBSCRIBERSAnalysis: Trump promised $2 gas and cheaper groceries. Here’s what voters got.

FOR SUBSCRIBERSHe’s in the West Wing. He’s at the rally. He’s got Trump’s ear. Bill Pulte is everywhere.

FOR SUBSCRIBERSNew AI tool for voters offers a specialized chatbot to explain your ballot

FOR SUBSCRIBERSGOP retreats from North Carolina as Trump admits Democrats likely to win Senate seat

FOR SUBSCRIBERSNetflix’s latest cliff-hanger? Where it’s headed as a business

FOR SUBSCRIBERSOpenAI agents are shutting off ways to monitor misbehavior

FOR SUBSCRIBERSWhy John Turturro is having the best year of any New Yorker

FOR SUBSCRIBERSJames Talarico digs in with Black voters in pursuit of an elusive Democratic win in Texas

FOR SUBSCRIBERSRussian operatives likely spread fake videos targeting the Texas Senate race, researchers say

FOR SUBSCRIBERSRepublicans seek inroads with Black voters in Michigan’s tight Senate race

FOR SUBSCRIBERSEurope’s protests are about more than schools — they’re a generational roar

FOR SUBSCRIBERSTrump is desperate to bring gas prices down. The solution might be in India.

FOR SUBSCRIBERSInteractive map: How far do you live from the nearest data center?

FOR SUBSCRIBERSA decade ago, data centers overtook a rural community. It hasn’t been the same since.

Slide 1 of 1

“The court has recognized the fundamental importance of protecting voters’ sensitive personal information and dismissed this illegal federal overreach," the statement said. "Voters should never have to choose between their privacy and their fundamental right to vote."

"Today’s ruling affirms that the federal government is not entitled to unfettered access to private voter data,” they added.

In a separate case, a federal judge in Oregon said Wednesday that he was tentatively planning to dismiss the Justice Department’s lawsuit in that state but that he would issue his final decision in a written opinion in the near future.