Federal government has no right to California voters' sensitive data, judge rules

A federal judge ruled today that the Trump administration is not entitled to personal information belonging to California’s 23 million voters. Judge David O. Carter made the ruling.

Last year, the U.S. Department of Justice sued California, along with 22 other states and Washington, D.C., for access to their full, unredacted voter files. That includes driver’s license, social security numbers and other sensitive data.

DOJ officials said they needed the data to assess whether states were properly maintaining their voter rolls and ensuring "only American citizens are voting, only one time," as Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a social media post in December.

Keep up with LAist.

If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.

Subscribe

California refused, citing state and federal privacy law. Only a handful of states have complied with the government’s request for their full voter files, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, which has been tracking the issue nationwide.

What did the judge say?

In Judge Carter’s ruling, he wrote that amassing sensitive information at the federal level would have a chilling effect on voter registration, which would lead to decreased turnout “as voters fear that their information is being used for some inappropriate or unlawful purpose.”

He added, “This risk threatens the right to vote which is the cornerstone of American democracy."

LAist emailed a request for comment to a spokesperson for the Department of Justice but has not yet received a response.

Reaction to the ruling

Jenny Farrell, executive director of the League of Women Voters of California, applauded the decision. The group had joined California in opposing the government’s data request.

“ We think that voters should never have to choose between their privacy interests and the right to participate in our democracy,” she said.

Justin Levitt, a Loyola Law School professor and former Department of Justice employee said, “The court did what we thought the court should do.”

Levitt and a group of other former DOJ employees had filed an amicus brief in the case, siding with California.

In a news release, California Secretary of State Shirley Weber wrote: “I will continue to uphold my promise to Californians to protect our democracy, and I will continue to challenge this administration's disregard for the rule of law and our right to vote.”

What's next?

The DOJ's lawsuits against other states are still making their way through the courts.

During a hearing in the case in December, Judge Carter said he anticipated his eventual ruling — whichever way it went — would be appealed, and that a final decision on the issue could rest with the U.S. Supreme Court.