{"id":141981,"date":"2026-01-16T14:45:22","date_gmt":"2026-01-16T22:45:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/01\/16\/courts-dropkick-dojs-disenfranchisement-database\/"},"modified":"2026-01-16T14:45:22","modified_gmt":"2026-01-16T22:45:22","slug":"courts-dropkick-dojs-disenfranchisement-database","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2026\/01\/16\/courts-dropkick-dojs-disenfranchisement-database\/","title":{"rendered":"Courts Dropkick DOJ\u2019s Disenfranchisement Database"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Justice Department\u2019s hamfisted effort to seize control of state voter rolls got slapped down hard this week. Twice<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The DOJ\u2019s Civil Rights Division demanded extensive voter data and sued 23 states, along with the District of Columbia, for refusing to hand it over. The government\u2019s theory is that allowing ineligible voters to cast ballots disenfranchises eligible voters by diluting the value of their ballots. And the only solution to this nonexistent problem<\/a> is for states to hand over their complete voter rolls, let the federal government scrutinize the data, and tell them which voters to delete. Citing state privacy laws, most states agreed to provide redacted lists only, withholding drivers license and social security numbers. But this was insufficient for the DOJ, which plans to build a nationwide database<\/a> maintained by the federal government. <\/p>\n

The lawsuits cite the National Voter Registration Act, which orders states to make \u201ca reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters\u201d and \u201cmake available for public inspection \u2026 all records concerning the implementation of programs conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of official lists of eligible voters.\u201d The feds read this as requiring disclosure of \u201cthe current electronic copy of California\u2019s computerized statewide voter registration list,\u201d including \u201call fields contained within the list.\u201d <\/p>\n

Secondarily, the feds rely on the Civil Rights Act of 1960 \u2014 not<\/em> 1964 \u2014 in which Congress ordered registrars to keep \u201call records and papers which come into [their] possession relating to any application, registration, payment of poll tax, or other act requisite to voting\u201d and make them available for \u201cinspection, reproduction, and copying\u201d by the Attorney General upon presentation of a demand stating the basis for the request. <\/p>\n

Using a law specifically designed to stop states from disenfranchising Black citizens to carry out a nationwide voter purge might make some lawyers a bit queasy. But not Harmeet Dhillon! The president\u2019s former personal attorney is currently suing multiple states for \u201cviolating\u201d Title IX by letting trans girls play sports. Dhillon actually told the Wall Street Journal<\/a> that she \u201cbegins her workday scrolling through X, searching for claims of discrimination,\u201d after which \u00a0\u201cI text my deputies, and we assign cases, and we get cranking.\u201d <\/p>\n

This woman will not be shamed!\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

The first court to rule was the District of Oregon, where Judge Mustafa Kasubhai said on the bench Wednesday that he will almost certainly dismiss the DOJ\u2019s claim<\/a> for exceeding the language of the NVRA and CRA. PBS<\/a> reports that the DOJ cited Oregon\u2019s high percentage of registered voters as a potential sign of failure to remove ineligible voters. But the court demurred: \u201cI\u2019m very cautious and doubtful that what you\u2019re asking for, which is an unredacted list, is actually going to give you the information that you need to establish a violation.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

Judge Kasubhai has yet to issue a written ruling, but Judge David Carter of the Central District of California beat him to the punch<\/a>. The 81-year-old jurist got a Bronze Star in Vietnam, became a state court judge in 1981, joined the federal bench in 1998, and is out of fucks to give<\/em>. Warning that \u201cdemocracy can be lost in a generation,\u201d he lambasted the executive branch for seizing power over local elections which the Constitution specifically vests in Congress and the states.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere cannot be unbridled consolidation of all elections power in the Executive without action from Congress and public debate,\u201d he wrote. \u201cThis is antithetical to the promise of fair and free elections our country promises and the franchise that civil rights leaders fought and died for.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThe taking of democracy does not occur in one fell swoop; it is chipped away piece-by-piece until there is nothing left,\u201d he concluded ominously. \u201cThe case before the Court is one of these cuts that imperils all Americans.\u201d<\/p>\n

Judge Carter dismissed the case in its entirety, and two hours later the DOJ noticed its appeal. Sure, the Civil Rights Division is bleeding lawyers<\/a> and hundreds of staff have been taken offline<\/a> to review the Epstein Files. But when it comes to chipping away at democracy, they\u2019ll make the time.<\/p>\n

\n

Liz Dye<\/a>\u00a0produces the Law and Chaos\u00a0Substack\u00a0<\/a>and\u00a0podcast<\/a>.<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0You can subscribe by clicking the logo:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/p>\n

The post Courts Dropkick DOJ\u2019s Disenfranchisement Database<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Justice Department\u2019s hamfisted effort to seize control of state voter rolls got slapped down hard this week. Twice<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The DOJ\u2019s Civil Rights Division demanded extensive voter data and sued 23 states, along with the District of Columbia, for refusing to hand it over. The government\u2019s theory is that allowing ineligible voters to cast ballots disenfranchises eligible voters by diluting the value of their ballots. And the only solution to this nonexistent problem<\/a> is for states to hand over their complete voter rolls, let the federal government scrutinize the data, and tell them which voters to delete. Citing state privacy laws, most states agreed to provide redacted lists only, withholding drivers license and social security numbers. But this was insufficient for the DOJ, which plans to build a nationwide database<\/a> maintained by the federal government. <\/p>\n

The lawsuits cite the National Voter Registration Act, which orders states to make \u201ca reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters\u201d and \u201cmake available for public inspection \u2026 all records concerning the implementation of programs conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of official lists of eligible voters.\u201d The feds read this as requiring disclosure of \u201cthe current electronic copy of California\u2019s computerized statewide voter registration list,\u201d including \u201call fields contained within the list.\u201d <\/p>\n

Secondarily, the feds rely on the Civil Rights Act of 1960 \u2014 not<\/em> 1964 \u2014 in which Congress ordered registrars to keep \u201call records and papers which come into [their] possession relating to any application, registration, payment of poll tax, or other act requisite to voting\u201d and make them available for \u201cinspection, reproduction, and copying\u201d by the Attorney General upon presentation of a demand stating the basis for the request. <\/p>\n

Using a law specifically designed to stop states from disenfranchising Black citizens to carry out a nationwide voter purge might make some lawyers a bit queasy. But not Harmeet Dhillon! The president\u2019s former personal attorney is currently suing multiple states for \u201cviolating\u201d Title IX by letting trans girls play sports. Dhillon actually told the Wall Street Journal<\/a> that she \u201cbegins her workday scrolling through X, searching for claims of discrimination,\u201d after which \u00a0\u201cI text my deputies, and we assign cases, and we get cranking.\u201d <\/p>\n

This woman will not be shamed!\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

The first court to rule was the District of Oregon, where Judge Mustafa Kasubhai said on the bench Wednesday that he will almost certainly dismiss the DOJ\u2019s claim<\/a> for exceeding the language of the NVRA and CRA. PBS<\/a> reports that the DOJ cited Oregon\u2019s high percentage of registered voters as a potential sign of failure to remove ineligible voters. But the court demurred: \u201cI\u2019m very cautious and doubtful that what you\u2019re asking for, which is an unredacted list, is actually going to give you the information that you need to establish a violation.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

Judge Kasubhai has yet to issue a written ruling, but Judge David Carter of the Central District of California beat him to the punch<\/a>. The 81-year-old jurist got a Bronze Star in Vietnam, became a state court judge in 1981, joined the federal bench in 1998, and is out of fucks to give<\/em>. Warning that \u201cdemocracy can be lost in a generation,\u201d he lambasted the executive branch for seizing power over local elections which the Constitution specifically vests in Congress and the states.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere cannot be unbridled consolidation of all elections power in the Executive without action from Congress and public debate,\u201d he wrote. \u201cThis is antithetical to the promise of fair and free elections our country promises and the franchise that civil rights leaders fought and died for.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThe taking of democracy does not occur in one fell swoop; it is chipped away piece-by-piece until there is nothing left,\u201d he concluded ominously. \u201cThe case before the Court is one of these cuts that imperils all Americans.\u201d<\/p>\n

Judge Carter dismissed the case in its entirety, and two hours later the DOJ noticed its appeal. Sure, the Civil Rights Division is bleeding lawyers<\/a> and hundreds of staff have been taken offline<\/a> to review the Epstein Files. But when it comes to chipping away at democracy, they\u2019ll make the time.<\/p>\n

\n

Liz Dye<\/a>\u00a0produces the Law and Chaos\u00a0Substack\u00a0<\/a>and\u00a0podcast<\/a>.<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0You can subscribe by clicking the logo:<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/p>\n

The post Courts Dropkick DOJ\u2019s Disenfranchisement Database<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Justice Department\u2019s hamfisted effort to seize control of state voter rolls got slapped down hard this week. Twice. The DOJ\u2019s Civil Rights Division demanded extensive voter data and sued 23 states, along with the District of Columbia, for refusing to hand it over. The government\u2019s theory is that allowing ineligible voters to cast ballots […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":141982,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-141981","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/law-and-chaos-logo-liz-dye-300x153-tMJEA5.jpg?fit=300%2C153&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141981","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=141981"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/141981\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/141982"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=141981"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=141981"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=141981"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}