Federal Judge Dismisses DOJ Lawsuit Demanding California Voter Rolls, Cites Threat to Democracy
A federal judge dismissed a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit seeking access to California’s voter rolls on Thursday, deeming the request “unprecedented and illegal” and accusing the federal government of attempting to undermine the right to vote. The ruling represents a significant victory for California officials and raises critical questions about federal overreach into state election administration.
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, a Clinton appointee based in Santa Ana, expressed deep skepticism about the Justice Department’s motivations, characterizing the lawsuit as not merely an overstep into state-run elections, but a direct threat to American democracy.
“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,” Carter wrote in his ruling. “This risk threatens the right to vote which is the cornerstone of American democracy.”
The judge warned that the erosion of democratic principles often occurs gradually, “chipped away piece by piece until there is nothing left,” and positioned the Justice Department’s lawsuit as one such damaging step.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment late Thursday. However, earlier in the day, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, who leads the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, publicly defended the department’s efforts. In a video posted to the social media platform X, Dhillon stated her office was proud of its work to “clean up the voter rolls nationally,” including through legal action against states. “We are going to touch every single state and finish this project,” she said.
California Secretary of State Shirley Weber strongly opposed the lawsuit, asserting her responsibility to protect the privacy of California’s voter data. “I will continue to uphold my promise to Californians to protect our democracy, and I will continue to challenge this administration’s disregard for the rule of law and our right to vote,” Weber said in a written statement.
Governor Gavin Newsom’s office framed the decision as another instance of “Trump and his administration losing to California,” referencing a recent court victory upholding the state’s congressional redistricting plan, which the Trump administration had also challenged.
The Justice Department initiated the lawsuit in September after Weber refused to provide detailed voter information for approximately 23 million Californians. The department alleged that Weber was unlawfully obstructing federal authorities from ensuring state compliance with federal voting regulations and safeguarding elections against fraud. Similar lawsuits were filed against election officials in other states who also resisted the data requests.
The legal challenge followed an executive order issued by President Trump in March that sought to require proof of citizenship for voters and to invalidate mail ballots received after election day. It also stemmed from years of unsubstantiated allegations by Trump regarding widespread voter fraud in California, including claims of non-citizen voting, and his broader, disproven assertion that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.
In September, Attorney General Pam Bondi asserted that “clean voter rolls are the foundation of free and fair elections,” and that the Justice Department was committed to establishing them nationwide. Weber, however, dismissed the lawsuit as a “fishing expedition and pretext for partisan policy objectives,” and an “unprecedented intrusion unsupported by law or any previous practice or policy of the U.S. Department of Justice.”
The Justice Department’s demands were extensive, including a “current electronic copy of California’s computerized statewide voter registration list”; lists of “all duplicate registration records” in several counties; a “list of all duplicate registrants” removed from the statewide list, along with removal dates; a list of registrations canceled due to voter deaths; an explanation for a decline in “inactive” voters; and a list of “all registrations,” including sensitive personal information like date of birth, driver’s license number, and the last four digits of Social Security Number, canceled due to non-citizenship.
Judge Carter specifically criticized the Justice Department’s attempt to leverage federal civil rights laws to justify its data request. “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,” he wrote. He emphasized that legislation like Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 and the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993 were designed to protect the voting rights of Black Americans and combat discriminatory registration practices, not to facilitate broad data collection.
The judge found that the Justice Department failed to articulate a clear rationale for requiring unredacted voter files for millions of Californians and asserted that the executive branch lacks the authority to demand such data without providing a sufficient justification. The ruling underscores the importance of protecting voter privacy and safeguarding the integrity of state-run election systems.
