Federal Appeals Court Blocks DOJ Attempt to Access Michigan Voter Rolls

On June 24, 2026, a three‑judge panel from the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower‑court order that prevents the Department of Justice from obtaining Michigan’s unredacted voter registration files. The decision stops a long‑standing effort by the Trump administration to collect personal voter data from states across the country.

The judges concluded that the 1960 Civil Rights Act does not give the federal government the authority to demand state‑maintained voter rolls, which contain sensitive information such as partial Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers and dates of birth. The majority opinion stressed that the law was originally intended to protect the right to vote, not to create a tool for checking whether individuals have voted.

State officials, led by Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, argued that the voter rolls are records created by the state itself and therefore fall outside the scope of the federal statute. The appeals court agreed, distinguishing between documents voters submit to the state—information the federal government may request—and the aggregated voter file that the state compiles internally.

Legal analysts note that this ruling adds to a series of decisions in which courts have rejected the Justice Department’s demands for unredacted voter data. So far, nine district courts have ruled against the administration, and this is the first time an appellate panel has weighed in. The precedent reinforces the principle that states retain control over their voter registration databases.

Voting‑rights advocates celebrate the decision as a protection for privacy and a safeguard against potential disenfranchisement. They warn that using outdated or inaccurate data sources to purge voters could wrongfully remove eligible citizens, particularly naturalized immigrants who may have been misidentified as non‑citizens.

The ruling comes at a critical moment as the nation approaches the November 2026 midterm elections. With the federal government’s attempt to centralize voter information halted, states will continue to manage their own voter rolls, maintaining the balance of power envisioned by the Constitution.

While the administration may consider appealing the decision, legal experts predict that any further challenge will face an increasingly skeptical judiciary. The outcome underscores the enduring importance of state sovereignty in election administration and the protection of individual voting rights.