The Justice Department has directed election officials in at least 30 states to preserve records from the 2024 election while separate federal lawsuits seeking states’ complete voter-registration databases remain unresolved.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom.
The Justice Department has instructed election officials in at least 30 states to preserve records from the 2024 election as the department continues a nationwide legal effort to obtain complete statewide voter-registration databases.
Letters sent to state election officials say the chief election officials “are currently under investigation” and subject to “ongoing litigation,” according to The New York Times. The department has not disclosed the specific scope of the investigations or said whether they are civil or criminal.
The preservation notices arrived shortly before the expiration of the federal 22-month retention requirement for records associated with the 2024 election. Federal law generally requires officials to retain records and papers relating to voting in federal elections for 22 months.
The letters are distinct from the Justice Department’s ongoing lawsuits seeking states’ full voter-registration lists, although DOJ spokeswoman Kiersten Pels said they were sent to jurisdictions involved in those cases.
Pels confirmed the notices went to “the states we are in active litigation against regarding their failure to provide the full” statewide registered voter list.
The department maintains that federal election laws authorize the attorney general to demand the records to evaluate whether states are complying with federal requirements. DOJ has argued that statewide registration databases can be analyzed to identify potentially improper registrations and has sought information that some states have declined to provide because of state and federal privacy concerns.
The Justice Department has filed 31 federal lawsuits against 30 states and Washington, D.C., seeking access to the statewide lists. According to the University of Wisconsin Law School’s State Democracy Research Initiative tracker, 23 of those suits have been dismissed on the merits at the district court level, while other litigation and appeals remain pending. The tracker also says no district or appellate court had ruled for DOJ in the contested cases as of its Sept. 1 update.
The litigation has not followed a purely partisan pattern. Among the states targeted are Republican-led Idaho, Kentucky and West Virginia, along with states governed by Democrats.
DOJ has separately issued a legal opinion concluding that federal law permits the department to compel production of statewide voter lists and share the information with the Department of Homeland Security for investigations involving potential voter fraud.
Several state election officials have objected to the federal demands, while saying they will comply with applicable record-preservation obligations.
Calli Jones, a spokeswoman for the Arizona secretary of state’s office, said Arizona officials would continue following their existing retention rules.
“Our office and our counties follow state document retention laws,” Jones said, “and to imply otherwise is an insult to the work that election administrators do in Arizona.”
Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar, a Democrat, has characterized the broader series of federal demands and legal actions as an effort to overwhelm state election administrators.
Aguilar described the approach as “‘flood the zone’ of harassment and intimidation and threats of legal action hoping we’d fold at some point.”
“We’re going to continue to follow the law and do what’s in the best interest of our voters,” Aguilar said.
Nevada officials have said they will preserve relevant records because of the continuing litigation. Similar preservation notices have been reported in other states involved in the voter-data disputes.
The federal government’s request comes as states have resisted turning over portions of their voter databases containing information they consider sensitive. The University of Wisconsin tracker says the records sought by DOJ can include birth dates, partial Social Security numbers and driver’s license numbers, with states citing privacy laws among their reasons for withholding some information.
The Justice Department, meanwhile, contends that access to complete lists is necessary to perform federal election-law oversight and to allow voter databases to be checked for potentially improper registrations.
The timing of the new letters has drawn questions because election administrators already face legal obligations to preserve evidence relevant to pending litigation, in addition to the federal election-record retention requirements.
David Becker, a former Justice Department voting rights lawyer, questioned what additional purpose the notices serve so close to the 2026 midterm elections.
Sending such a letter before the elections “is completely meaningless,” Becker said.
“There’s only two reasons to send that letter: Either the lawyers who send it don’t understand litigation obligations, or they’re hoping that states will misinterpret it and retain more than they’re legally required,” he added.
The Justice Department has not specified whether the investigations referenced in the preservation letters extend beyond the disputes already being litigated over voter-registration records.
For now, the notices require affected election officials to maintain potentially relevant 2024 materials even as the separate question of whether DOJ can compel states to surrender complete voter-registration databases continues through federal courts.
The preservation demands therefore open another front in the continuing dispute between the federal government and state election administrators: DOJ says it is exercising federal authority to enforce election laws and examine voter-registration records, while resisting states have argued that the department is seeking sensitive information beyond what federal law permits.
With the 22-month federal retention period for 2024 election materials reaching its end and multiple voter-data cases still pending, the states receiving DOJ’s notices will now retain the relevant records while those legal disputes continue.
Original article
Comments