DOJ tells states to preserve 2024 election records as voter-data fight expands

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department has told election officials in 29 states and the District of Columbia to preserve 2024 election records as it presses a nationwide effort to obtain detailed voter-registration data, intensifying a federal-state clash over election administration weeks before November voting.¹

The preservation letters, reported Thursday by The Associated Press, instruct officials not to destroy records in states the Trump administration has sued for access to statewide voter files. Those files include sensitive personal information, such as addresses, dates of birth, driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers.¹

The department described the demand as a litigation hold tied to pending voter-data cases. In one letter obtained by AP, a Justice Department official told Utah Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson that she was “under investigation” and subject to ongoing litigation over the state’s refusal to provide statewide voter-registration lists.¹

The letters mark a shift from courtroom filings to direct pressure on state election offices. They come as states prepare for the November 3, 2026, midterm elections and as the administration fights in separate litigation to revive a Postal Service rule that would require states to submit mail-ballot recipient lists and use voter-specific barcodes.³⁴⁷

States named in the voter-file fight

AP reported that the Justice Department sent preservation demands to 29 states and Washington, D.C.; Democracy Docket reported that the department targeted 30 states in active voter-records litigation.¹²

The states publicly identified in the broader DOJ voter-file litigation are California, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Massachusetts, Georgia, Illinois, Wisconsin, Utah, Oklahoma, Kentucky, West Virginia, New Jersey, Connecticut, Arizona, Virginia, Idaho and Washington, along with the District of Columbia.²

The department’s lawsuits seek unredacted voter files from states that have resisted turning over sensitive registration data, often citing state privacy laws and limits on disclosure.¹² AP reported that judges have repeatedly dismissed DOJ lawsuits seeking detailed state voter information, while Attorney General Todd Blanche has suggested the administration could take the dispute to the U.S. Supreme Court.¹

DOJ cites civil-rights and election laws

The preservation letters cite obligations to retain hard-copy and electronic records that may be relevant to litigation. AP reported that the letter it obtained warned that failure to preserve relevant data could amount to spoliation of evidence and expose officials to civil or criminal sanctions.¹

Democracy Docket reported that the letters invoked the Civil Rights Act of 1960 and told states they were under investigation for alleged noncompliance with the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act because they had not turned over unredacted voter files.²

Justice Department officials have said they need the data to determine whether states are complying with federal list-maintenance laws.¹ State officials and voting-rights groups say states already maintain voter rolls under detailed procedures and that the federal demand could conflict with privacy protections.¹⁶

The Civil Rights Act of 1960 includes federal election-record retention provisions, while the NVRA and HAVA govern voter-registration systems, list maintenance and election administration standards. The dispute centers on how far those statutes allow DOJ to go in demanding full, unredacted statewide voter files.²

State officials say they will follow the law

Henderson, Utah’s top elections official and a Republican, told AP her office understands the need to retain records during litigation. But she said the wording of the DOJ letter was alarming because previous correspondence had not said the state was under investigation.¹ She criticized what she described as a steady stream of accusations against election administrators.¹

Arizona and Minnesota also confirmed receiving the letter.¹ Calli Jones, a spokesperson for the Arizona secretary of state’s office, told AP the office would follow the law and said any suggestion that Arizona election administrators were not doing so was disrespectful.¹

Minnesota Secretary of State spokesperson Cassondra Knudson said the state would comply with the request, while noting that it goes beyond the federal requirement to retain election records for 22 months after an election.¹

The responses reflect the posture of many state election offices: comply with preservation obligations, but resist federal demands for unredacted voter files that officials say may violate state privacy laws or expose protected voters.¹⁶

A broader pre-midterm agenda

The record-preservation push is part of a wider administration effort focused on election integrity, noncitizen-voting claims and mail-ballot rules. AP reported that President Donald Trump issued an executive order earlier this year seeking to create a federal voter list and involve the U.S. Postal Service more directly in election operations. The administration has also backed proof-of-citizenship legislation for voter registration before the midterms.¹

That agenda is already under judicial scrutiny. On September 10, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the administration’s request to lift an injunction blocking parts of a USPS mail-ballot rule.³⁴ The rule would require states and localities to meet ballot-envelope design requirements, use unique barcodes and upload voter-specific information to a USPS portal before ballots could be mailed.³⁴

The appeals court said the rule was likely a regulation of the “manner of holding elections,” an area the Constitution assigns to states and Congress rather than an executive agency acting without congressional authorization.³⁴ The court also said the record showed a risk of chaos and widespread disenfranchisement if the rule took effect before the November 3 election, and found no record evidence of past fraud or likely impending fraud tied to that election.⁴

In a Supreme Court filing the same day, the Justice Department argued that the USPS rule is a lawful exercise of the Postal Service’s authority over envelope design and addressee information. The department said those requirements support election integrity and proper delivery of sensitive mail.⁵ The filing asked the Supreme Court to swiftly stay what it called a baseless injunction, warning that ballots were being sent without the rule’s protections.⁵

Election officials have warned that complying with the USPS requirements is impractical because ballots are already being sent in states including Alabama, North Carolina and Wisconsin, and because the required online portal had not yet been activated.⁷ AP reported that the same mail-voting case is before the Supreme Court as states begin sending ballots for the midterms.⁷

Privacy concerns extend beyond voter rolls

The voter-data and mail-ballot disputes also raise privacy concerns. Some election officials worry that unredacted voter files could be shared across federal agencies, including for citizenship checks.¹ In the mail-ballot case, advocacy groups warned the Supreme Court that requiring mail-ballot recipient lists could expose voters enrolled in address-confidentiality programs, including survivors of domestic violence, sexual violence or stalking.⁶

An amicus brief filed by domestic-violence and legal advocacy groups said 45 states and the District of Columbia have some form of address-confidentiality program and argued that the USPS rule’s list requirement is incompatible with those systems.⁶ The groups said affected voters could be forced to choose between protecting confidential information and voting by mail.⁶

For state election administrators, the immediate conflict is practical as well as legal: They must preserve 2024 records, defend against federal lawsuits seeking voter files, and prepare for November voting while courts decide whether the administration can impose new federal conditions on mail ballots.¹⁴⁷

DOJ tells states to preserve 2024 election records as voter-data fight expands

More from Siften World

Trump’s $5,000 check pledge runs into Congress’s power of the purse

Things to know

Comments

Source Material

States named in the voter-file fight

DOJ cites civil-rights and election laws

State officials say they will follow the law

A broader pre-midterm agenda

Privacy concerns extend beyond voter rolls

Key topics covered

Japan’s Indonesia wildfire mission puts disaster relief at the core of regional defense ties

India’s BRICS test: keeping an expanded bloc aligned as Iran war strains summit message

Xi’s BRICS Visit Opens India-China Dialogue, but Border and Business Strains Limit Reset