- The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) requires states to maintain accurate voter lists and make records of those maintenance activities available for inspection.
- The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) mandates that each state keep a single, uniform, official, centralized, and computerized statewide voter registration list.
- The Civil Rights Act of 1960 (CRA) empowers the Attorney General to demand election records — including voter registration rolls — for inspection and analysis.
The DOJ’s filings argue that each defendant state failed to comply with these mandates, and that the federal government has a right and duty to enforce compliance.
From a legal perspective, the DOJ is entering this fight from a position of strength. The statutory language of the NVRA, HAVA, and CRA is clear and has been repeatedly upheld by courts. States may argue that voter privacy concerns justify withholding full registration data, but federal courts have historically rejected those defenses when they conflict with explicit congressional mandates.
In short: the law sides with the DOJ.
That said, we should expect some of these states to fight hard, particularly California and New York, both of which have previously clashed with federal authorities on election transparency issues. Their legal teams may argue that disclosing the full rolls poses risks to voter security or violates state-level data privacy laws. But under supremacy principles, those defenses are unlikely to prevail.
