A federal judge in California handed the Trump administration its first major legal defeat on Thursday in a nationwide effort to force states to turn over sensitive voter registration information.
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, dismissed a Justice Department lawsuit that sought access to California’s unredacted voter file, including highly personal data such as Social Security numbers and driver’s license information. The ruling is the first decision in a series of similar cases the administration has filed against more than 20 states.
The Golden State is one of 23 states, along with Washington, D.C., that the DOJ has sued for refusing to provide detailed voter data. All of the targeted states are led by Democrats or were carried by President Donald Trump’s opponent, then-former Vice President Joe Biden, in the 2020 election. The Trump administration is seeking the data out of concern about blue states’ refusal to purge dead or inactive voters from their records, which Republicans say can weaken election integrity.
In a sharply worded 33-page opinion, Carter rejected the DOJ’s argument that it needs unrestricted access to state voter rolls to ensure compliance with federal election laws.
“The government’s request is unprecedented and illegal,” Carter wrote. He warned that handing over such information could discourage people in minority groups or legal immigrants from participating in elections.
“The DOJ’s request for the sensitive information of Californians stands to have a chilling effect on American citizens like political minority groups and working-class immigrants who may consider not registering to vote or skip casting a ballot because they are worried about how their information will be used,” the judge added.
Carter also accused the DOJ of misusing civil rights laws to justify an expansive data grab.
“The Department of Justice seeks to use civil rights legislation which was enacted for an entirely different purpose to amass and retain an unprecedented amount of confidential voter data,” he wrote.
He went further, describing the suit as a “telltale ‘fishing expedition,’” adding that “even the federal government is not permitted to sue first, obtain discovery, and finalize its allegations later.”
The California case is part of a broader federal government clash related to oversight of state election data. Federal officials argue they need full voter lists to verify that states are properly maintaining their rolls. State election administrators from both parties have pushed back, warning that the federal government has never before had such access.
The DOJ declined to comment on whether it would be considering an appeal.
Attorney General Pam Bondi defended the lawsuits when they were filed in September, arguing that federal oversight is necessary to protect election integrity.
“Clean voter rolls are the foundation of free and fair elections,” Bondi said at the time. “Every state has a responsibility to ensure that voter registration records are accurate, accessible, and secure.”
Civil liberties groups praised Carter’s ruling. In a joint statement, the American Civil Liberties Union and other organizations called the decision a rejection of federal overreach.
“The court has recognized the fundamental importance of protecting voters’ sensitive personal information and dismissed this illegal federal overreach,” the groups said.
COURT RULES CALIFORNIA CAN USE NEW DEMOCRATIC-FAVORED CONGRESSIONAL MAP
Meanwhile, a federal judge in Oregon indicated Wednesday that he is tentatively planning to dismiss a nearly identical DOJ lawsuit there as well.
Carter acknowledged his ruling is unlikely to be the final word and predicted it will be appealed, potentially all the way to the Supreme Court.