A federal judge has rebuffed the Justice Department’s attempt to get a look at Maryland’s complete voter lists, ruling that the law doesn’t require the state to turn them over.
U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher, a Trump appointee, dismissed the Justice Department’s request for the lists in a ruling Thursday, saying that a Civil Rights-era law the federal government had cited doesn’t actually apply to Maryland’s voter list.
The ruling is the latest in a string of defeats for the Justice Department in its quest to try to force states to clean up their voter rolls.
The Justice Department has filed lawsuits against about 30 states to get a look at their complete rolls. Federal lawyers have cited the Civil Rights Act of 1960, which allows the government to demand any records that “come into … possession” of state election officials.
But Judge Gallagher said the state voter registration list, or SVRL, doesn’t fit that. Since it is the state’s compilation of all of the voter registrations, it is created by the state, rather than coming into its possession.
“Accordingly, this court joins every court to have addressed this issue in concluding that an SVRL is not a record or paper that a state must produce to the United States under the CRA,” the judge wrote.
In that respect, her ruling tracks with several other judges who have likewise concluded that state voter lists are beyond the DOJ’s reach.
“This is a victory for every Marylander who wants to participate in democracy without fear,” the American Civil Liberties Union and others who rose to oppose the Justice Department in the case said in a joint statement Monday.
They said the push for voter lists was an attempt to “intimidate eligible voters” and to pressure states to boot some voters from their lists.
The Washington Times has sought comment from the Justice Department.
States compile voter lists from registration forms filled out by would-be voters. Under Judge Gallagher’s reasoning, those forms could be subject to the Justice Department’s demands, but the lists the state compiled are not.
Trump-appointed judges in Arizona, Michigan and Maine have reached similar conclusions. Democrat-appointed judges, meanwhile, have gone even further, ruling that the government hasn’t given a valid purpose for its demand for the records.
The Justice Department has appealed a number of those rulings and the cases are pending in federal circuit courts.
All told, nine judges have ruled against the Justice Department. No judge has yet to rule in favor of the Trump administration in its quest for the records.
One case reached a settlement.
Cases against Virginia and the District of Columbia have yet to reach decisions.
According to court documents, the government is seeking the state voter lists so it can compile the information and try to spot ineligible people on the rolls. That includes people registered in more than one place, people who have been reported to the federal government as deceased, and noncitizens.
Maryland, for example, had Ian Andre Roberts, an illegal immigrant, on its voter rolls for more than a decade. Roberts hasn’t been a resident of Maryland for years.
He was finally removed this month after he was sentenced to federal prison for lying about his citizenship in order to win a job as superintendent of schools in Des Moines, Iowa.
The Justice Department, in its lawsuits against states, is seeking names and identifying information such as addresses, birthdates and partial Social Security numbers or driver’s license numbers. That’s enough information to be able to cross-compare lists across states.
In addition to battling state-by-state, voting-rights activists have moved to challenge the entire attempt to create a national database of voters, saying it interferes with states’ ability to run elections.
Some states, including Maryland, share the information with a private group, the Electronic Registration Information Center, but refuse to give it to the feds.
“State law allows us to do that,” Jared DeMarinis, administrator of Maryland’s State Board of Elections, told the General Assembly this year.
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.