A federal appeals court ruled the Trump administration has no legal right to demand voters' private data, dealing a fresh blow to its unlawful bid to control American elections.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals handed down the 2-1 decision Wednesday, siding with Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D-MI), who refused to turn over the birthdates, partial Social Security numbers, and driver's license numbers of every registered voter in the state.
This wasn't a one-off request.
Starting in the summer of 2025, the Department of Justice sent the same demand to more than 40 states and Washington, D.C. Most refused. The DOJ sued 30 of them.
The lawsuits were part of something bigger.
President Donald Trump signed executive orders in early 2025 trying to take control of elections — a power the Constitution gives to Congress and the states, not the president. Courts blocked most of those orders. So the administration tried a different route: sue states for their voter data using a 1960s civil rights law.
However, that law was written to protect Black voters from discrimination — not to hunt for people who shouldn't have voted. The court noted the administration had flipped the law's original purpose upside down, now invoking it "to ensure that some people have not voted."
"I told them they can't have it," Benson said.
Critics say the endgame is a national voter database the federal government would use to flag voters as ineligible and pressure states to purge them before the 2026 midterms.
"Collecting, consolidating, and misusing highly sensitive personal voter data is part of the Trump administration's strategy to usurp control of elections in order to baselessly cast doubt on and ultimately overturn any unfavorable results the 2026 midterms," said Sara Chimene-Weiss, counsel for Protect Democracy.
The court ruled Michigan's voter file doesn't qualify under the 1960 law because the state built it — it wasn't handed over by voters. The DOJ also botched its own demand letters, failing to include both legally required elements in a single request.
At least eight district courts had already tossed similar DOJ suits. But this is the first federal appeals court ruling — and it sets a binding precedent.
The DOJ still has active suits against more than 20 states — and today's ruling just handed every one of them a powerful new weapon to fight back.