Judge denies Trump administration access to Illinois voter data
[August 04, 2026]
By Peter Hancock
SPRINGFIELD – A federal judge ruled late Friday that Illinois is not
required to hand over its complete, unredacted voter registration data,
including sensitive personal information, to the Trump administration.
In a 14-page opinion, Judge Colleen Lawless reached the same conclusion
as judges in 18 other federal districts and one appellate circuit who
have ruled in nearly identical cases. She found that the Civil Rights
Act of 1960 does not give the U.S. attorney general “general auditing
power” to demand voter data.
No court has yet ruled in favor of the administration’s demand for voter
data.
She also said the Department of Justice failed to provide any factual
basis for suggesting state officials have done anything wrong in
maintaining the state’s voter registration database and that it offered
no legitimate purpose for seeking the information.
“The Attorney General’s demand is deficient in both its stated basis and
purpose and cannot be enforced against (Illinois State Board of
Elections Executive Director Bernadette) Matthews,” Lawless wrote.
Demand for data
The Justice Department began demanding access to states’ unredacted
voter registration rolls shortly after President Donald Trump took
office for a second term in 2025.
The lists include sensitive personal information such as dates of birth,
driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers — what
election law expert David Becker has referred to as “the Holy Trinity of
identity theft.”
In August 2025, the state elections board gave DOJ a copy of its
statewide voter registration database, with sensitive information
redacted. That is the same information it makes available to candidate
committees and political parties, but lawyers for DOJ said that was
insufficient.
In its petitions, DOJ said it needed the complete database to ascertain
whether states were meeting their legal duties under federal laws to
maintain accurate and up-to-date voter rolls and to take affirmative
steps to purge the rolls of ineligible voters, including noncitizens.
DOJ cited a provision of the Civil Rights Act giving the attorney
general authority to “demand in writing” from state election officials
any “record or paper” related to an election that has taken place in the
previous 22 months.
[to top of second column]
|
The Paul Findley Federal Building in Springfield. (Capitol News
Illinois file photo)
But attorneys representing outside groups that intervened in the
Illinois case argued that was only a pretext and that DOJ’s real purpose
was to purge state voter rolls of suspected noncitizens by
cross-checking their rolls with a national citizenship database.
Court ruling
In her opinion, Lawless did not address that alternate theory about
DOJ’s motives. Instead, she focused on the agency’s stated reasons.
She said the Civil Rights Act does not give federal investigators
blanket authority to demand records from state election officials and
that it requires them to show both a “basis and purpose” for the demand.
Lawyers for the Justice Department argued they met that obligation
simply by citing the legal authority that the statute gives to demand
the information. But Lawless rejected that argument.
“If the Attorney General could simply justify his demand with a
statement of any purpose whatsoever, the requirement that he specify his
purpose (and his basis) would be pointless and it would provide him with
unfettered authority to demand voting records,” Lawless wrote.
She said the Civil Rights Act of 1960 was enacted to combat racial
discrimination in voting and that a demand for records under that law
“must relate to Congress’s rationale behind granting the Attorney
General investigatory authority over certain federal voting records.”
“Congress did not confer a general auditing power to the DOJ over state
election officials,” she wrote.
Capitol News Illinois is
a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government
coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily
by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick
Foundation.
 |
