The U.S. Department of Justice ignited a fierce political and legal battle this week by suing Oregon and Maine, accusing both states of violating federal law by refusing to hand over comprehensive voter registration data. The lawsuits, filed on September 16, 2025, mark a striking escalation in the federal government’s ongoing campaign to access detailed voter information from states nationwide—a move that has drawn sharp rebuke from state officials, privacy advocates, and election experts alike.
According to the Associated Press, the Justice Department’s complaints allege that Oregon and Maine failed to provide electronic copies of their statewide voter registration lists, including personally identifiable details such as names, birth dates, addresses, and either driver’s license numbers or partial Social Security numbers. The department also accused Oregon of withholding information about how it maintains its voter rolls and data on ineligible voters.
These lawsuits are the first of their kind in the DOJ’s broad effort to obtain voter data from at least 26 states. The department has issued sweeping requests in recent months, often following up with urgent letters and threatening additional legal action against states that do not comply. Both Minnesota and California were warned they could face similar lawsuits if they continue to resist the federal requests.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon, who leads the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, defended the lawsuits in a press release: “States simply cannot pick and choose which federal laws they will comply with, including our voting laws, which ensure that all American citizens have equal access to the ballot in federal elections.” Dhillon further asserted, “American citizens have a right to feel confident in the integrity of our electoral process, and the refusal of certain states to protect their citizens against vote dilution will result in legal consequences.”
But state leaders are not backing down. In a statement issued shortly after the lawsuits were announced, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows decried the DOJ’s demands as a “federal abuse of power.” Bellows, a Democrat, declared, “Maine has some of the best elections in the nation. It is absurd that the Department of Justice is targeting our state when Republican and Democratic Secretaries all across the country are fighting back against this federal abuse of power just like we are.”
Bellows has twice rejected the DOJ’s requests for sensitive voter data, first on August 8 and again on September 8, 2025. She maintains that complying would violate federal privacy laws, including the Privacy Act of 1974 and the e-Government Act of 2004, as the DOJ has not explained how it would securely store or use the data. “Complying would put the privacy and data security of Mainers at risk,” she warned. Bellows also pointed out that other states, such as New Hampshire and Pennsylvania, have similarly refused the DOJ’s requests without facing lawsuits, raising questions about the department’s motives. “It is not normal that they are targeting just me and Oregon with these lawsuits. Why aren’t they targeting New Hampshire or Pennsylvania, who have Republican secretaries of state who have said no?” she asked at a press conference. In a pointed retort, she added, “Go jump in the Gulf of Maine.”
Oregon’s Secretary of State, Tobias Read, echoed Bellows’ concerns and promised a vigorous defense. “If the President wants to use the DOJ to go after his political opponents and undermine our elections, I look forward to seeing them in court,” Read stated. “I stand by my oath to the people of Oregon, and I will protect their rights and privacy.” Read, who campaigned on protecting Oregon’s pioneering vote-by-mail system, argued that the DOJ’s requests go far beyond what is required by federal law. He noted that Oregon offers the public a redacted version of its voter rolls—names, addresses, party affiliation, and birth year—but not full birth dates, Social Security numbers, or driver’s license numbers. To access this public data, the federal government could simply file a records request and pay a $500 fee, Read said, but the DOJ has insisted on unredacted versions instead.
The DOJ’s legal filings cite alleged violations of the National Voter Registration Act, the Help America Vote Act, and the Civil Rights Act of 1960. The department claims that both states’ refusals undermine efforts to ensure only eligible voters remain on the rolls, particularly by not providing information about individuals removed due to noncitizenship, incompetency, or felony convictions. However, election officials and privacy advocates have raised alarm bells about the breadth of the information sought and the lack of clarity about how it would be protected or used.
According to the Maine Morning Star and Oregon Capital Chronicle, neither state had received formal notice of the lawsuits as of late September 16, nor had any documents appeared in federal court records. Yet the DOJ’s press release and the subsequent media coverage left little doubt about the seriousness of the federal push. In Maine, Bellows emphasized her state’s longstanding reputation for election integrity and high voter turnout. “We stand by the integrity of Maine election officials at both the state and local level,” she told Democracy Docket. “Maine ranks consistently at the top of the nation in voter turnout because our voters have confidence in the strength of our systems. DOJ is targeting Maine and Oregon for political reasons. We won’t back down.”
Oregon, for its part, has over 3 million registered voters. The DOJ’s request would require turning over full names, dates of birth, residential addresses, and driver’s license or partial Social Security numbers for each voter. Read argued that such a broad handover would violate Oregonians’ constitutional right to privacy and state laws. He also pointed out that while Oregon does provide some voter data to the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC)—a bipartisan nonprofit used by states to identify duplicate registrations or voters who have moved—ERIC uses cryptographic one-way hashing to ensure sensitive data can’t be read by humans.
The lawsuits come amid broader national tensions over election security, privacy, and federal authority. The DOJ’s requests have sparked concern among election officials who note that the Constitution grants states and Congress—not the federal executive branch—the power to administer elections. The specter of federal overreach has united officials from both parties in opposition, with some fearing that sensitive voter data could be used for partisan purposes, including efforts to identify noncitizen voters or to undermine trust in the electoral process. Ariel Hayes, executive director of the Democratic Association of Secretaries of States, warned that the lawsuits “are designed to intimidate election officials and open the door for Trump and his allies to weaponize sensitive voter information for partisan gain.”
The Justice Department has not limited its efforts to voter rolls. In August 2025, it requested access to voting machines used in the 2020 election in Missouri, though it has not clarified the purpose of that inquiry. Meanwhile, reporting from Stateline and other outlets confirmed that the DOJ is sharing state voter roll information with the Department of Homeland Security as part of its search for noncitizens on the rolls, further heightening concerns about data privacy and potential misuse.
As the legal wrangling intensifies, the outcome of these lawsuits could have sweeping implications for the balance of power between state and federal authorities, the privacy of millions of voters, and the future of American election administration. For now, both Maine and Oregon remain resolute in their refusal, setting the stage for a high-stakes showdown in federal court that will test the limits of privacy, transparency, and democracy itself.
