Madison, Wis. – The Republican Party of Wisconsin filed a sharply worded brief Tuesday with a federal court, urging judges to compel state election officials to hand over complete, unredacted voter rolls to the Justice Department under the Trump administration. The filing, however, goes far beyond a standard legal argument, deploying inflammatory rhetoric, historical inaccuracies and even basic errors in an attempt to justify the request for sensitive voter data. The move is the latest in a series of efforts to access voter information, raising concerns about privacy and potential misuse.
The 27-page amicus brief, obtained by time.news, doesn’t simply support the DOJ’s attempt to access Wisconsin’s voter rolls; it presents a sweeping and often disjointed argument steeped in culture war themes. The document contains typographical errors and draws parallels between current voting rights protections and the discriminatory practices of the Jim Crow era, a comparison critics have called deeply offensive and historically inaccurate. The filing also expresses anxieties about immigration, alleging threats to the integrity of elections from non-citizens, despite lacking supporting evidence.
The core of the dispute centers on the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s refusal to provide the DOJ with access to the state’s full voter file, including sensitive personal information like birthdates, driver’s license numbers, and partial Social Security numbers. While much of Wisconsin’s voter file is already publicly available, the DOJ is seeking data not typically shared due to privacy concerns. The Wisconsin GOP argues that the state is obstructing a legitimate federal investigation, while state officials and voting rights advocates contend the request oversteps legal boundaries and poses a risk to voter privacy.
Drawing a Controversial Parallel to Jim Crow
Perhaps the most striking aspect of the Wisconsin GOP’s brief is its comparison of the state’s resistance to the DOJ’s request to the tactics used by Southern states during the Jim Crow era to disenfranchise Black voters. The brief cites Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960, arguing it was intended to preempt state laws obstructing federal voting rights investigations. “Like Alabama in the 1950s, Wisconsin attempts to use state law to obstruct the Attorney General’s investigation today,” the filing states. This comparison has drawn sharp criticism from legal experts, who point out that the original intent of the Civil Rights Act was to prevent the destruction of records used to discriminate against voters, not to authorize broad data collection.
The brief further suggests that the Civil Rights Act should now be used to protect “all Americans” from perceived threats to voting rights, including those posed by non-citizens. This framing, critics argue, shifts the focus of civil rights law away from protecting historically marginalized groups and towards a broader, more ambiguous notion of election security.
Claims About Non-Citizen Voting and Immigration
The Wisconsin GOP’s brief also includes unsubstantiated claims about widespread non-citizen voting. The filing alleges that allowing “nearly 10 million (by conservative estimates) foreign nationals” into the United States has “directly imperiled numerous rights of Americans,” including voting rights. However, the brief offers no evidence to support these claims, and even acknowledges elsewhere that there is no evidence of significant non-citizen voting in Wisconsin. The argument relies on the assertion that the absence of evidence proves the need for further investigation.
Attacks on Former DOJ Officials and Internal Errors
The brief doesn’t limit its criticism to state election officials. It also attacks former Department of Justice officials who have filed amicus briefs opposing the DOJ’s request, labeling them “ideological activists.” In one instance, the filing incorrectly names the organization founded by David Becker, a former DOJ voting attorney, as the “Center for Election and Innovation Research” when it is actually the Center for Election Innovation & Research (CEIR). The brief also contains a misspelling of former Attorney General Eric Holder’s name, referring to him as “Aric Holder,” and mis-cites the Privacy Act.
This is not the first time the DOJ has sought access to state voter rolls. Similar lawsuits have been dismissed by courts in other states, highlighting the legal challenges facing the federal government’s efforts to obtain this data. According to reporting from WBAY, Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul argues that federal law does not supersede state law regarding voter data privacy.
The Wisconsin GOP’s filing underscores a broader effort to cast doubt on the integrity of elections and portray the protection of voting rights as evidence of wrongdoing. The case is ongoing, and the court is expected to rule on the DOJ’s motion to compel the Wisconsin Elections Commission to provide the requested voter data in the coming weeks. The outcome could have significant implications for voter privacy and the balance of power between state and federal governments in election administration.
The next step in this legal battle is a hearing scheduled for March 5, 2026, where arguments will be heard regarding the DOJ’s motion to compel. Updates on the case can be found on the Democracy Docket website.
Have thoughts on this story? Share your comments below and join the conversation.
