Want to Lower the Cost of Living? Unrig our Democracy.

Representing two Alaska voters, the League of Women Voters of Alaska, and Common Cause, the American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of Alaska moved to intervene in United States v. Alaska, a frivolous lawsuit seeking to prevent from the State of Alaska from certifying its election results if the incumbent U.S. Senator does not win the election. The lawless suit asserts a single claim based on the purpose language of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), that has no basis in any case, legal principle, or arguably tenable reading of the NVRA. We are seeking dismissal of this suit that aims to deprive Alaskans of their right to vote and right to representation.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A federal court sided with Common Cause and voters in their lawsuit against the Department of Justice (DOJ), ruling the DOJ’s campaign to consolidate sensitive voter data violates voter privacy and illegally intrudes on states’ authority over elections. The court’s decision protects eligible voters’ freedom to cast a ballot without fear that their personal information will be misused, shared without authorization, or weaponized to challenge their eligibility. “The Trump administration has repeatedly taken extreme measures to interfere with how elections are run, undermine confidence in the results, and create confusion,” said Ming Cheung, Senior Staff Attorney with the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project. “This effort to seize sensitive voter data is part of that same pattern, and today’s ruling makes clear that the administration cannot use the federal government to disrupt elections or put voters’ rights at risk.” Over the past year, the DOJ has demanded full, unredacted voter rolls from 49 states and Washington, D.C. These records vary by state but include sensitive personal data like home addresses, social security numbers, and voting history. The agency intended to compare state voter list data with the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) notoriously inaccurate Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system in an effort to identify suspected noncitizens on state voter rolls and demand that states revoke their voter registration. The SAVE system has repeatedly and mistakenly flagged lawful U.S. citizens as ineligible to vote. The ruling states that the court “vacates a policy that has removed United States citizens from the voter rolls in their home states and risks disenfranchising many more—a policy that flies in the face of duly enacted laws designed to protect Americans. When the federal government defies federal laws, our system of checks and balances permits individuals to turn to federal courts for recourse. And if they prevail, courts are duty-bound to step in under the Constitution.” This ruling comes after federal judges in 26 states plus the 6th Circuit dismissed the DOJ’s demands, ruling the agency’s attempts to consolidate voter data unlawful. With the 2026 midterms rapidly approaching, the DOJ’s actions are part of a coordinated attempt by the Trump administration to deceive the public with false election claims, disrupt how states run their elections, and deny results they don’t like. This ruling demonstrates how federal courts can serve as an important check on the Trump administration’s authority. “I never imagined I’d have to worry about whether my personal information was safe just for exercising my right to vote,” said Plaintiff Ruth Nasrullah from Texas. “Today’s ruling means that I can head into November’s election with more trust that my data – and my vote – are protected.” “After I found out I’d been removed from the voter rolls as an eligible voter, it felt like I had my right to vote wrongly taken away,” said Plaintiff Anthony Nel from Texas. “No other voter should have to go through what I did, and this ruling protects every eligible voter from having their registration mistakenly revoked for no reason.” “This is a victory for voters and yet another loss for the Department of Justice. It’s time the Trump administration stop these desperate attempts to seize voters’ private data and take control of our elections,” said Virginia Kase Solomón, Common Cause President and CEO. “Every voter deserves to know their private data is secure and that they won’t be wrongly denied their freedom to vote. We are proud to win this protection for those whose election officials failed them.” The plaintiffs are represented by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Protect Democracy, the American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia (ACLU-D.C.), and the Democracy and Rule of Law Clinic at Harvard Law School. “The Constitution and federal law are clear: states are responsible for maintaining their voter rolls, not the federal government,” said Nikhel Sus, Chief Counsel at CREW. “We are grateful for this decision, which is yet another setback in the Trump administration’s larger illegal scheme to take over states’ constitutional roles and federalize election administration.” “If the federal government were genuinely concerned about election security, it would not even consider compiling sensitive voter records in a massive centralized database with so little regard for the risks,” said Jane Bentrott, counsel at Protect Democracy. “This database violates federal privacy laws and puts millions of eligible voters’ data in harm’s way. Today’s ruling is a win for voters, a win for national security, and a win for free and fair elections.” “This decision reaffirms a simple principle: safeguarding voters’ personal information isn’t optional.” said Laura Follansbee, staff attorney at ACLU-D.C. “We applaud this decision and remain committed to ensuring that every eligible voter can participate in our democracy without fear that their private information will be improperly collected or misused.” “It’s no surprise that the Trump administration’s misguided attempts to take over elections have failed once again,” said Larry Schwartztol, Professor of Practice and Faculty Director of the Democracy and Rule of Law Clinic at Harvard Law School. “Today’s ruling joins a growing list of courts that have rejected this administration’s efforts to seize control of voter data and election administration. The Trump administration does not have the authority to nationalize elections, seize voter data, or override the states’ role in election administration — no matter how many times it tries.”

The ACLU could have its busiest Supreme Court term ever, with potential cases on immigration, voting rights, and religious freedom in schools.

President Trump and his allies are trying to interfere with the 2026 midterm elections. Here’s what that means for your vote, and how the ACLU is fighting back to ensure power remains where it belongs — in the hands of voters.