Trump DOJ Demands State Voter Data With Social Security Numbers/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ The Trump administration is requesting voter registration data from states, including sensitive details like partial Social Security numbers. Several states are resisting, citing privacy concerns and federal overreach. The move signals a broader push by Trump to assert control over elections ahead of the 2026 midterms.
Voter Data Dispute Quick Looks
- Trump DOJ requests full voter registration data from states
- Data includes names, addresses, birthdates, and partial SSNs
- Letters signed by Civil Rights Division chief Harmeet Dhillon
- Multiple states refuse, citing privacy and legal concerns
- DOJ cites authority under federal civil rights laws
- Experts question necessity of sensitive data for oversight
- Trump pushes for federal control over state-run elections
- Democrats fear political use of voter data to fuel fraud claims
- Court battles expected as states challenge federal authority
- Orange County, CA, already faces DOJ lawsuit over voter info
Deep Look
Trump Administration Sparks National Showdown Over State Voter Data
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a sweeping escalation of federal involvement in elections, the Trump administration has launched a campaign to collect detailed voter registration data from all 50 states — including sensitive personal information such as partial Social Security numbers — drawing fierce opposition from election officials across the country.
The requests, sent in recent weeks by Harmeet Dhillon, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, have landed in the inboxes of state election officials with a clear directive: hand over full, unredacted copies of their voter registration databases.
That includes names, addresses, birthdates, driver’s license numbers, and the last four digits of voters’ Social Security numbers — data that many states regard as private and protected under law.
Federal Push Raises Privacy Alarms
The DOJ claims the data is needed to enforce federal laws requiring states to maintain accurate voter rolls. However, many election officials see the request as federal overreach — and a potential misuse of power by a White House looking to influence the 2026 midterms.
“We’re going to fight as far as we have to against this,” said Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes. “I’m not going to give up the personal identifying information of my voters.”
Fontes, a Democrat, emphasized that states already have robust systems for maintaining their voting lists and that the requested data only captures a temporary snapshot of voter rolls.
Pennsylvania Secretary of State Al Schmidt echoed the concern, writing to Dhillon that the DOJ’s demand is a “concerning attempt to expand the federal government’s role in our country’s electoral process.”
DOJ Points to Voting Law Authority
Federal law allows the DOJ to ensure that voter rolls are maintained and accurate — such as removing voters who have died or moved. However, it does not grant the DOJ power to manage or store voter registration data itself.
In her letters, Dhillon also invoked a 1960 civil rights law granting broad authority to inspect election records, adding further legal ambiguity to the federal request.
Critics, like Northwestern University election law professor Michael Kang, say the inclusion of sensitive data, especially Social Security numbers, is unnecessary for oversight.
“I don’t think you need people’s Social Security numbers for voter-list maintenance,” Kang said.
Despite requests for clarification, the DOJ has not explained how the data would be used or stored.
Backlash Builds from State Leaders
States pushing back against the DOJ’s demands include Arizona, Pennsylvania, California, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, and Oregon, according to officials speaking with CNN.
Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon has refused to comply, even amid pressure from Republican legislators in his state, saying he believes the legal ground supports state resistance.
“I don’t have a sense at this point what the Justice Department really wants,” Simon said. “A reasonable person could conclude the stated reason isn’t the real reason.”
David Becker, a former DOJ voting rights attorney and director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research, called the federal push a significant overreach.
“Americans should be very concerned,” Becker said. “The DOJ is asking states to hand over sensitive voter data without explaining how it will be used.”
Still, some conservatives support the DOJ’s approach. J. Christian Adams, president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, defended the push as legitimate election oversight.
“The Attorney General has the power to say, ‘Show me your work,’” Adams told CNN. “This is not a close call.”
Trump’s Executive Orders Stir Legal Fights
President Donald Trump has taken a more aggressive stance toward election control in his second term, issuing executive orders directing federal agencies to verify citizenship in voter rolls and require voter ID for registration — portions of which have already been temporarily blocked by courts.
On social media, Trump declared, “States must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY.”
His administration is also encouraging GOP-led states to redraw congressional districts to favor Republicans ahead of the 2026 midterms. Missouri is set to hold a special session this week to target one of the state’s two Democrat-held House seats.
Meanwhile, DOJ officials have indicated they will reach out to all 50 states, according to Maria Benson, spokesperson for the National Association of Secretaries of State.
So far, at least 26 states have received requests for a wide range of election-related information, from voter rolls to the identities of election officials, per the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law.
Legal Battle Looms Over Voter Privacy
The confrontation is expected to escalate in court. The DOJ has already sued Orange County, California, as part of a broader investigation into alleged non-citizen voting. Local officials there are refusing to share individual voter data without a court order.
Election officials in other states are also bracing for legal action. And with midterms looming, the tug-of-war over voter data could become a defining legal fight over the boundaries of federal election oversight.
In the words of Arizona’s Adrian Fontes, “The federal government doesn’t run elections — we do. And we will protect our voters’ privacy.”
You must Register or Login to post a comment.