The United States Department of Justice, since the onset of the second Trump administration in 2025, has sent letters to 44 states and the District of Columbia demanding complete voter rolls. The demand includes partial Social Security numbers. Moreover, in response to refusal due to state privacy laws, the agency has sued more than 20 states.
The Department of Justice, Under the Second Trump Administration, is Pressuring States to Hand Over Unredacted Data and Information About Voters
Claimed Federal Voter List Maintenance
Note that the DOJ claims it needs the data to ensure states are complying with the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act. Both laws require states to use reasonable efforts to remove people who should no longer be voting. The problem is that the DOJ has failed to explain how these laws provide the basis for obtaining sensitive personal data.
A report by Jonathan Shorman of Stateline also noted that there is an indicator that the agency is sharing the collected data with the Department of Homeland Security to cross-reference them with citizenship databases. This is part of the broader effort to identify and remove non-citizens from the voter rolls. Advocates warn that this is an inefficient process.
It is worth noting that a New York Times piece in May 2025 by Sheera Frenkel and Aaron Krolik reported that the Trump administration tapped the controversial tech company Palantir to compile data on millions of Americans and immigrants. This is in line with an executive order signed in March 2025 that aims to remove information silos through centralization.
Nevertheless, with regard to voter file acquisition, the DOJ is using a combination of legal pressure and confidential negotiations. It has pressed states to sign a confidential agreement, which includes a 45-day rule to remove flagged voters and a clause for sharing data with third-party contractors, to facilitate the data transfer. The DOJ has also used more than 20 states.
At least 11 states, including Alaska, Arkansas, and Texas, have handed over their data. Over 20 states have fought the demands in courts. Observers suggest the administration is attempting to create a de facto national voter database that could be used to sow distrust in election results ahead of the 2026 midterms and challenge subsequent election outcomes.
Court Decision and Key Legal Arguments
The Central District Court of California dismissed on 15 January 2026 the case filed by the agency against California. District Judge David O. Carter noted that the effort to collect sensitive voter data paints an alarming picture regarding the centralization of information within the executive branch, without the approval of the U.S. Congress.
Federal interference and assertions in the electoral system are a recurring theme in the second Trump administration. Trump, in a Truth Social post published on 18 August 2025, also claimed that states are merely agents for the federal government in counting and tabulating votes. He added further that they must do what the federal government tells them to do.
State and local election officials, not the federal government, have been primarily responsible for the administration of voter registration. Derek Clinger, Senior Counsel at the State Democracy Research Initiative, explained that this stems from the Elections Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which directs states to administer elections for offices in the federal government.
The particular constitutional clause directs states to set the time, place, and manner of federal office elections. It also grants the U.S. Congress the authority to alter such. Lawmakers have imposed certain federal requirements on state voter registration systems. Examples include the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act.
Privacy laws should also bar government agencies from collecting sensitive data. Former Justice Department official Justin Levitt noted that the Privacy Act of 1974 requires federal agencies collecting data from other government entities to notify Congressional committees, publish notice in the Federal Register, and allow for public comment.
FURTHER READINGS AND REFERENCES
- Central District of California. 15 January 2026. USA v. Shirley Weber et al. Central District of California. Available online
- Clinger, D. 19 December 2025. “Explainer: Can the Federal Government Force States to Hand Over Citizens’ Voter Information?” State Democracy Research Initiative. University of Wisconsin-Madison. Available online
- Frenkel, S. and Krolik, A. 30 May 2025. “Trump Taps Palantir to Compile Data on Millions of Americans.” The New York Times. Available online
- Levitt, J. 18 July 2025. “The Recent Rash of DOJ Voter File Requests.” Election Law Blog. Available online
- Marcus, J. 31 May 2025. “Has Big Brother Arrived? Inside the Secretive Trump Effort to Centralize Government Data on Millions of Americans.” The Independent. Available online
- Shorman, J. 12 September 2025. “DOJ is Sharing State Voter Roll Lists With Homeland Security.” Stateline. Available online
- Thomas, S. 19 August 2025. “Trump Claims States are Agents For the Federal Government. He is Wrong.” Konsyse. Available online