A federal judge has delivered a significant blow to the Department of Justice’s recent efforts, ruling that the agency can no longer be trusted in its pursuit of voter roll data. This decision stems from a perceived disconnect between the DOJ’s public pronouncements and its actions, leading a judge to conclude that the presumption of regularity, typically afforded to government entities, no longer applies. Essentially, the court is stating that assurances from the DOJ regarding the privacy and intended use of sensitive data must now be met with heightened scrutiny, especially when these assurances appear to conflict with public statements.
The judge’s ruling highlights a profound loss of faith in the Department of Justice’s intentions and methods.… Continue reading
A federal judge in Georgia dismissed a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit against the state seeking voter information, ruling the suit was filed in the wrong location. The Justice Department, which is collecting detailed voting data from various states, can refile the lawsuit. This legal action follows the state’s refusal to provide voter information due to concerns over privacy, with Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger citing state law preventing the release of confidential voter data. The issue has become politically charged, with some state Republicans criticizing Raffensperger’s resistance and supporting his primary opponent.
Read More
The Texas Secretary of State’s Office has provided the U.S. Justice Department with the state’s voter roll, containing information on approximately 18.4 million registered voters. This action follows the Justice Department’s request to all 50 states for their voter rolls, citing the need to enforce election laws and maintain voter list accuracy. However, this has raised concerns from experts and the Democratic National Committee, who worry about potential privacy violations and the possibility of eligible voters being removed from the rolls. The DNC is concerned the turnover of data is a “big government power grab” and could violate federal election law. Despite these concerns, Texas has stated its understanding that the agreement will not impact its responsibilities under the National Voter Registration Act or other federal laws.
Read More
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued requests for voter information to numerous states, encompassing both Republican and Democratic-led jurisdictions. Some states were offered access to the federal SAVE database to verify their voter lists. However, legal concerns have been raised by election law experts, who suggest that the request may violate the 1974 Privacy Act. Both Democratic and Republican officials across the country have rejected the DOJ’s requests, citing concerns about the federal government’s overreach into state electoral processes.
Read More
Trump’s DOJ contacting states for voter data and access to voting machines is a disturbing pattern that demands attention. It’s hard to ignore the implications of such actions, especially considering the context of past election challenges and ongoing concerns about election integrity. The very act of requesting such sensitive information, particularly when combined with the push for access to voting machines, raises red flags about potential manipulation or interference in the electoral process.
One can’t help but wonder what the ultimate goal was. Was this a genuine attempt to investigate alleged voter fraud, or was it something more sinister? The timing of these requests, coupled with the broader political landscape, fuels speculation about the intentions behind them.… Continue reading
President Trump’s executive order, ostensibly aimed at ensuring fair elections, includes provisions exceeding executive authority, such as mandating documentary proof of citizenship and ballot receipt deadlines. More concerningly, the order empowers the Justice Department to withhold federal election funding from states refusing information-sharing agreements. This compels states to share data on voter registration, even routine maintenance tasks, potentially weaponizing the DOJ against states. Election experts warn this oversteps presidential power and could cripple state election administration.
Read More
Matt Underwood 
John Q. Hosedrinker