Summary
This memorandum opinion of the Office of Legal Counsel concludes that the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division may demand statewide voter registration lists from states under sections 301 and 303 of the Civil Rights Act of 1960, codified at 52 U.S.C. §§ 20701 and 20703. It further concludes that state privacy or confidentiality laws do not permit withholding responsive information and that the lists may be shared with the Department of Homeland Security to help identify individuals allegedly ineligible to vote. The memorandum is dated May 12, 2026, and identifies itself as 50 Op. O.L.C. __.
Holdings
- Statewide voter-registration lists are records relating to voter registration that come into the possession of state election officers and therefore fall within section 301's retention-and-preservation requirement.
- Section 303 requires production of responsive voter-registration information without redaction or withholding based on contrary state privacy or confidentiality provisions.
- The Division satisfied section 303's requirement that a demand state its basis and purpose by identifying the objective of assessing state compliance with NVRA and HAVA list-maintenance requirements. Section 303 does not require detailed evidence of a violation or a particular level of preexisting suspicion.
- On the facts presented, those statutes do not prevent the Division from obtaining statewide voter-registration lists.
- Equitable estoppel does not prevent the Division from using or sharing the lists because the States cannot establish a definite knowing misrepresentation or detrimental change in position.
- The Division may share the statewide voter-registration lists with DHS, including HSI, to identify individuals who may be ineligible to vote, provided the sharing is structured to satisfy the Privacy Act's law-enforcement or routine-use exception.
Questions Presented
- Whether section 303 of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 authorizes the Attorney General or a representative to demand statewide voter-registration lists from States.
- Whether statewide voter-registration lists fall within the records that section 301 requires election officers to retain and preserve.
- Whether States may withhold or redact responsive voter-registration information based on state privacy or confidentiality laws.
- Whether the statement-of-basis-and-purpose requirement in 52 U.S.C. § 20703 limits the purposes for which the lists may be demanded or requires a particular level of preexisting suspicion.
- Whether the Privacy Act, Driver's Privacy Protection Act, or E-Government Act limits the Division's authority to obtain the lists.
- Whether equitable estoppel prevents the Division from using or sharing lists after representing that the lists would be used for list-maintenance purposes.
- Whether the Division may share the lists with DHS for law-enforcement or routine-use purposes under the Privacy Act.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (23)
- Purcell v. Gonzalez, 549 U.S. 1, 4 (2006) (per curiam)(followed)
- Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181, 192, 197 (2008)(followed)
- Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, 584 U.S. 756, 761 (2018)(followed)
- Morales v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 504 U.S. 374, 383-84 (1992)(followed)
- Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan, Ltd., 566 U.S. 560, 566 (2012)(followed)
- Kennedy v. Lynd, 306 F.2d 222, 227-28 (5th Cir. 1962)(followed)
- Alabama ex rel. Gallion v. Rogers, 187 F. Supp. 848, 853, 855 (M.D. Ala. 1960), aff'd sub nom. Dinkens v. Attorney General, 285 F.2d 430 (5th Cir. 1961)(followed)
- United States v. Mississippi, 380 U.S. 128, 134, 136-38 (1965)(followed)
- United States v. Gonzales, 520 U.S. 1, 5 (1997)(followed)
- Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, 584 U.S. 453, 471, 478 (2018)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 23.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.