A federal district court judge told the Trump administration it can’t have Maryland’s voter rolls, dismissing the case and agreeing with courts across the country that have thrown out similar cases.
The Department of Justice requested the private lists from dozens of states and Washington, D.C., and sued those that refused to comply.
U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher dismissed the Maryland case on the merits, hours before the state’s gubernatorial primary Election Day.
The Justice Department argued federal statutes compel states to turn over voter rolls. Gallagher wrote in her opinion that the court will not interpret federal voting law “contrary to its text simply because an office of the party advancing that interpretation has adopted it.”
The White House referred questions to the Justice Department, which did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Gallagher’s decision hands President Donald Trump another loss in his efforts to amass a national voter database.
“Today’s ruling is a massive victory for voter privacy and a rejection of federal overreach,” said Joanne Antoine, executive director for the nonpartisan elections and democracy watchdog Common Cause Maryland. “The decision ensures voters are protected from an unauthorized national database that would have been a goldmine for hackers and a tool for intimidation.”
Federal judges have dismissed cases similar to Maryland’s in Michigan, California, Oregon and Massachusetts, among others, and accused the Trump administration of attempted overreach. The Trump administration has appealed some decisions.
A Rhode Island judge called it a “fishing expedition.” An Oregon judge said plans to use the rolls for immigration enforcement were “chilling.”
“The taking of democracy does not occur in one fell swoop; it is chipped away piece-by piece until there is nothing left,” U.S. District Court Judge David Carter of California wrote in his state’s dismissal. “The case before the Court is one of these cuts that imperils all Americans.”
At least 16 states have voluntarily handed their voter files over to the Justice Department, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.
Trump has attempted to exert more federal control over elections, issuing executive orders on mail voting, identification requirements and other aspects of voting. The Constitution gives states broad authority to administer elections, and courts have blocked some of Trump’s orders.
Federal law does not permit “unfettered access” to voter databases and does not empower the Justice Department to audit state rolls, argued Assistant Attorney General Daniel Kobrin, who represents the Maryland State Board of Elections, during the June 10 hearing.
Maryland’s database contains voting histories and other sensitive personal data, such as birth dates, driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers.
It’s unclear how the Justice Department planned to use the voting histories and personal data of millions of Marylanders. But the agency’s attorneys have stated in other court proceedings that it planned to share the lists with the Department of Homeland Security to aid immigration enforcement.
Gallagher pressed Justice Department attorney William Mohrman during the hearing to clarify what the agency would do with the lists. Mohrman said he wasn’t going to share details but that there were “no limits” on what the government could do.
The federal government would follow the law when handling the sensitive data, Mohrman said, but Maryland privacy law “can’t trump federal authority.”
Trump’s Justice Department filed the lawsuit in December after lead defendant Jared DeMarinis, Maryland’s elections administrator, pushed back on its request for the list and the names of election officials responsible for maintaining it.
DeMarinis responded in writing, outlining state and federal law governing the removal of voters who have moved or died.
“Maryland’s process errs on the side of removing any doubt in the cancellation before potentially disenfranchising a voter,” DeMarinis wrote.
DeMarinis directly asked the Justice Department whether it planned to use the lists for immigration enforcement, arguing Maryland voters “have the right to know” what the agency planned to do with the information.
Civil rights and voting rights advocates and three Maryland voters joined DeMarinis in opposing the Justice Department’s request, asking the court to protect voters’ privacy rights.
Comments
Welcome to The Banner's subscriber-only commenting community. Please review our community guidelines.