ZeroHour
CyberScooppublished ()ingested @CyberScoopNews

DOJ releases legal rationale for nationwide voter data collection

criticalExploit / PoC exploited in the wildimportance 60
Full article1,279 words · extracted from cyberscoop.com · click to collapse
Skip to main content

Get our latest cybersecurity news first on Google.

Click here!

The memo claims a robust executive branch role vetting voter eligibility. One Secretary of State called it a “fantasy” that “isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.”

Listen to this article

0:00

Learn more.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche speaks as FBI Director Kash Patel listens at a press conference at the Department of Justice on April 27, 2026 in Washington, DC. The officials took questions from the press and gave updates about the case against Cole Tomas Allen, the suspect in the shooting at the White House Correspondents Dinner. (Photo by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images)

The Trump administration released a legal opinion outlining the legal rationale behind its nationwide voter data collection efforts, justifying an aggressive federal role in vetting voter eligibility, a position courts have repeatedly rejected in related litigation.

The memo, released Tuesday by the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel, concedes that while election administration is “primarily the purview of the states,” the administration’s efforts are a lawful exercise of federal oversight.

The Justice Department grounds that rationale in a provision of the 1960 Civil Rights Act, requiring election officials to keep voter records for 22 months after an election so it can investigate potential civil rights violations. Under the memo’s reading, that retention rule also gives the Attorney General authority to obtain copies of those records “upon demand in writing.” 

The memo also cites several other federal election laws – like the Help America Vote Act, the National Voter Registration Act and the Voting Rights Act – as support for the executive branch’s efforts. It argues that those statutes have long required states to modernize and secure voting systems (including accessibility upgrades) and maintain accurate voter rolls by removing ineligible voters.

The memo further argues that the potential presence of one or more non-citizens on state voter rolls is enough to trigger the federal government’s nationwide data collection and sharing efforts with immigration authorities.

“Because illegal aliens are ineligible to vote, these generally applicable laws are also implicated by an illegal alien’s presence on a state’s voter rolls,” the memo states.

Multiple federal courts have come to the opposite conclusion, dismissing half a dozen lawsuits from DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security that would force states to comply. Further, states have repeatedly confirmed through recounts, audits, investigations and lawsuits that the number of non-citizens registered to vote (and who end up actually casting ballots) in U.S. elections is infinitesimal.

David Becker, executive director of the Center of Election Innovation and Research, noted in a post on BlueSky that “6 courts, including 2 judges appointed by the current president, think this ‘opinion’ isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.” Becker, a former DOJ senior trial attorney in the voting section of the Civil Rights Division, has consistently argued that the executive branch and White House have no legal or constitutional role to play in vetting state voter registration. 

Sarah Copeland Hanzas, Secretary of State for Vermont, gave a similar reaction when CyberScoop reached out for comment.

“It’s not worth the paper it’s printed on,” Hanzas said in a statement. “Or the electrons it takes to store and transmit 41 pages of fantasy.”

Election officials have largely resisted the federal government’s demands. Earlier this year, West Virginia Secretary of State Kris Warner told CyberScoop he had no intentions of handing over more information than is already publicly available.

“If they want it, they can have it: $500 dollars for [anyone to buy] the statewide list, but they’re not getting personal information,” Warner said in a January interview. “State law says we’re not sharing that and my job is to carry out the law laid out by the West Virginia legislature.”

The inability of the federal government to point to serious evidence of mass voter fraud or non-citizen voting has led states to rebuff attempts to collect sensitive data on every voter in their state, including names, social security numbers, home addresses, voter history and other details.

The administration says it intends to cross-check state data against immigration records, share that data with DHS and immigration enforcement agencies and ultimately create its own list of eligible voters. An executive order issued by the White House earlier this year sought to deny federal funding to states that did not accept voter lists from the federal government and directed the Attorney General to investigate state election officials for voter roll discrepancies. Voting groups have challenged the order’s legality, and a previous election-related executive order was largely ruled unconstitutional by the courts.

The administration has sued dozens of states who have refused to hand such data over, though it has yet to convince courts of the merit. One judge called the administration’s efforts “unprecedented and illegal” and accused the administration of twisting the Civil Rights Act and other federal laws that were passed “to protect hard won civil rights victories allowing access to the ballot box” in order to obtain unfettered access to state voter data.

More Scoops

Shasta County Clerk & Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis poses for a portrait in front of a large American flag in his new election observer area at the Market Street elections office on Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2026 in Redding, CA. (Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

Election official says Tina Peters would be consultant, won’t have access to election systems

Shasta County registrar Clint Curtis told CyberScoop he needs Peters to help manage the county’s 2026 elections and he’s not concerned about her past conviction.

An election worker processes mail-in ballots at the Los Angeles County Ballot Processing Center during California’s state primary election in the City of Industry, California, on June 2, 2026. Californians go to the polls Tuesday in the first round of voting for a new governor, with a tight three-way race for two run-off spots, while people in Los Angeles will also be voting for a new mayor. The state’s so-called “jungle primary” pits all comers against each other — regardless of party — with the top two vote-getters advancing to the November general election to replace term-limited Governor Gavin Newsom. (Photo by Patrick T. Fallon / AFP via Getty Images)

SCOTUS tosses one of two injunctions against Trump USPS mail-in ballot rules

The front of the U.S. Supreme Court building is seen after sunset on June 24, 2024, in Washington, DC. (Photo by J. David Ake/Getty Images)

Postal Service moves to finalize mail ballot regs before SCOTUS ruling

Latest Podcasts

Text extracted automatically; images, tables and formatting may be missing. Original: https://cyberscoop.com/federal-voter-data-collection-doj-legal-memo/