DOJ Releases Controversial Legal Memo Justifying Nationwide Voter Data Collection

The Trump administration has released a legal memo outlining its rationale for nationwide voter data collection, asserting an aggressive federal role in vetting voter eligibility—a position repeatedly rejected by courts in related litigation.

The memo, issued Tuesday by the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel, acknowledges that election administration is “primarily the purview of the states.” However, it argues that the administration’s efforts constitute a lawful exercise of federal oversight. The Justice Department bases this claim on a provision of the 1960 Civil Rights Act, which requires election officials to retain voter records for 22 months after an election to investigate potential civil rights violations. Under the memo’s interpretation, this retention rule grants the Attorney General authority to obtain copies of those records “upon demand in writing.”

The memo also cites several federal election laws—including the Help America Vote Act, the National Voter Registration Act, and the Voting Rights Act—as justification for the executive branch’s efforts. It contends that these statutes have long required states to modernize voting systems, enhance accessibility, and maintain accurate voter rolls by removing ineligible voters.

The memo further asserts that the mere presence of non-citizens on state voter rolls is sufficient to trigger federal data collection and sharing with immigration authorities. It states:

“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.”

This legal rationale has faced significant opposition. Multiple federal courts have dismissed lawsuits filed by the DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security that sought to compel states to comply with similar demands. Additionally, states have repeatedly confirmed through recounts, audits, and investigations that the number of non-citizens registered to vote—and who actually cast ballots—is negligible.

David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, criticized the memo in a post on BlueSky, stating 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 long argued that the executive branch and White House lack legal or constitutional authority to vet state voter registration.

Sarah Copeland Hanzas, Vermont’s Secretary of State, echoed this sentiment when contacted by CyberScoop. She called the memo “not worth the paper it’s printed on” and added, “Or the electrons it takes to store and transmit 41 pages of fantasy.”

Election officials across the country have largely resisted federal demands for voter data. Kris Warner, West Virginia’s Secretary of State, told CyberScoop earlier this year that he had no intention of providing more information than what 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