Case Summary
LWVOR and the ACLU of Oregon filed an amicus brief opposing the United States Department of Justice’s lawsuit demanding disclosure of Oregon voters’ private information. LWVOR and its co-amici argued that the DOJ had no right to access such information under the National Voter Registration Act, Help America Vote Act, or the Civil Rights Act of 1960, and that federal law did not preempt Oregon state privacy laws protecting voters.
Since the beginning of the second Trump Administration, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has repeatedly issued requests for states to disclose registered voters’ personal data. This data could be shared with the Department of Homeland Security for criminal and immigration investigations.
Oregon was among the states that received these requests. The DOJ requested the full, unredacted statewide voter registration list that included voters’ full name, date of birth, residential address, and either their state driver’s license number or the last four digits of their Social Security Number. The DOJ claimed the data was necessary to ensure compliance with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and later asserted the Civil Rights Act of 1960 and the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) entitled it to the unredacted list.
Oregon declined to provide the data, stating that the DOJ had no authority under federal law to make such demands but offered to provide the publicly available version of the statewide voter registration list, provided applicable state laws excluding voters’ confidential information were followed.
In response, on September 16, 2025, the DOJ filed a federal lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. The department sought an order requiring the Secretary of State to disclose the full, unredacted statewide voter registration list.
On November 24, 2025, the League of Women Voters of Oregon (LWVOR) and the ACLU of Oregon filed an amicus brief defending voter privacy. The brief argued that (1) the DOJ had provided no lawful basis for its request; (2) none of the statutes it cited in support — the NVRA, Civil Rights Act of 1960, and HAVA — gave it authority to receive the unredacted statewide voter list; and (3) the NVRA did not preempt Oregon’s state privacy law protections for voters. Finally, LWVOR and its co-amici pointed out that disclosure of such confidential information would burden the right to vote.
LWVOR is represented in this matter by Campaign Legal Center and the Brennan Center for Justice.
LWV Timeline
DOJ files lawsuit
The DOJ files a federal lawsuit, demanding Oregon disclose the full, unredacted statewide voter registration list, claiming it is entitled to the information under the NVRA, HAVA, and Civil Rights Act of 1960.
LWVOR files amicus brief
LWVOR and its co-amici file an amicus brief supporting voter privacy. The brief argues the DOJ failed to provide a legally valid purpose for its request, and that federal law does not entitle it to the unredacted statewide voter registration list. LWVOR also asserts granting the DOJ’s request would burden registrants’ right to vote and that the NVRA does not override Oregon’s voter privacy laws.
Court issues oral ruling dismissing case
The court issues a ruling from the bench, stating it will grant defendant's motion to dismiss the case, with a written order to follow.
District court issues written order of dismissal
The district court issues its written dismissal, ruling that (1) neither the NVRA nor HAVA allow the federal government to receive the unredacted voter file, and (2) the government failed to provide a valid basis or purpose to access the data under the Civil Rights Act of 1960. The district court also denies DOJ leave to amend its complaint, stating additional facts would not fix the legal deficiencies in its lawsuit.
DOJ appeals dismissal
The DOJ appeals the district court's decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
LWVOR files second amicus brief
LWVOR and LULAC file an amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit supporting the district court's dismissal of the case. The brief argues granting DOJ access to the private voter data at issue would chill voter registration and participation, particular among Latino voters. The brief also asserts the DOJ's justifications for its requests were pretexts to use data for unlawful purposes.
Ninth Circuit panel holds oral argument
A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit holds oral argument.