Conservative Lawsuit Forces Wisconsin to Purge 200,000 Voters Before 2020 Election

A Wisconsin judge orders the state Elections Commission to immediately remove over 200,000 voters from registration rolls following a lawsuit by the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty (WILL). The purge targets voters flagged as potential “movers” based on data suggesting they may have changed addresses, with the timing designed to impact the 2020 presidential election in this crucial swing state that Donald Trump won by just 23,000 votes in 2016.

The Lawsuit and Ruling

In October 2019, WILL files a lawsuit against the Wisconsin Elections Commission arguing that state law requires immediate removal of voters flagged by the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) as having potentially moved. ERIC data suggests approximately 234,000 registered voters may have changed addresses, and WILL demands these voters be removed from rolls immediately if they don’t respond to mailed notices within 30 days.

On December 13, 2019, Ozaukee County Circuit Judge Paul Malloy orders the Elections Commission to purge approximately 209,000 voters who did not respond to the mailed notices. The ruling requires immediate action, potentially removing voters from rolls months before the 2020 presidential election without adequate time to re-register or correct errors.

Political Targeting and Demographics

Analysis reveals that the purge disproportionately targets Democratic-leaning urban areas. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel finds that residents of Milwaukee and Madison—Wisconsin’s most diverse and heavily Democratic cities—account for 14% of the state’s registered voters but receive 23% of the commission’s notices. This geographic disparity suggests the purge will disproportionately impact likely Democratic voters.

The timing is transparently political. Wisconsin is expected to be one of the most hotly contested states in the 2020 presidential election. Trump won Wisconsin in 2016 by fewer than 23,000 votes—a margin far smaller than the 200,000+ voters targeted for removal. Removing these voters before the 2020 election could significantly impact the outcome.

WILL, described as the “MVP” of Wisconsin’s right-wing infrastructure, is hardly a neutral actor. The organization has deep ties to the Republican Party and has been central to conservative legal efforts in Wisconsin for the past decade. The lawsuit represents strategic litigation designed to shape the electorate for partisan advantage.

Problems With the Purge

The ERIC data flagging voters as “movers” has significant error rates. WILL itself acknowledges that approximately 5% of flagged voters—about 10,000 people—have not actually moved and would be wrongly purged. Other estimates suggest error rates may be higher. People are flagged for various reasons that don’t indicate they’ve moved: temporary address changes, data entry errors, commercial data matching problems, and algorithmic false positives.

The mailed notices that voters must respond to avoid purging often go unnoticed or are mistaken for junk mail. Many voters don’t realize that failure to respond will result in their removal from registration rolls. The 30-day response window is short, particularly for notices that arrive during holidays or that recipients don’t immediately recognize as official.

Immediate purging creates severe problems. Voters removed from rolls may not discover their removal until attempting to vote, too late to re-register before an election. In Wisconsin, same-day registration exists but creates longer lines and complications on Election Day. The purge creates chaos and confusion that suppresses turnout regardless of whether wrongly-purged voters eventually re-register.

Wisconsin Elections Commission Response

The Wisconsin Elections Commission had planned to wait before removing voters, wanting to verify data and provide adequate time for voters to respond. The Commission’s bipartisan approach—allowing more time to ensure accuracy and avoid wrongly purging eligible voters—reflects best practices in voter roll maintenance.

WILL’s lawsuit forces immediate action that the Commission believes is premature and likely to disenfranchise eligible voters. The judicial override of the Commission’s expert judgment demonstrates how courts can be weaponized to force aggressive voter purges that election administrators oppose.

Appeals Court Reversal

In February 2020, a state appeals court overturns Judge Malloy’s ruling, blocking the immediate purge. The Wisconsin Supreme Court eventually rules in 2020 that the Elections Commission should not remove voters flagged as possible movers, preventing about 69,000 people on the list from having their registrations deactivated before the November election.

However, the legal battle creates months of uncertainty and confusion. Many voters receive conflicting information about their registration status. The litigation demonstrates how even unsuccessful purge attempts can suppress votes through fear, uncertainty, and administrative chaos.

Significance

The Wisconsin purge attempt exemplifies modern strategic voter suppression: using litigation to force aggressive voter roll maintenance in swing states before crucial elections, disproportionately targeting Democratic-leaning areas, and timing actions to maximize electoral impact.

The case demonstrates how conservative legal organizations weaponize voter roll maintenance. While states have legitimate interests in maintaining accurate registration lists, WILL’s lawsuit pushes for immediate mass purges using imperfect data, prioritizing removal over accuracy. The willingness to accept 5% error rates—10,000+ wrongly purged voters—reveals that the goal is reducing the electorate, not accuracy.

The geographic and demographic targeting is transparent. By disproportionately impacting Milwaukee and Madison, the purge targets the most diverse and Democratic areas of Wisconsin. In a state Trump won by 23,000 votes, removing 200,000+ voters—even with some eventually re-registering—could determine the presidential outcome.

The case also shows how courts become partisan actors in election manipulation. Judge Malloy’s order to immediately purge despite the Elections Commission’s expert recommendation against it represents judicial intervention for partisan purposes. That the ruling is eventually overturned doesn’t negate its suppressive effects during the months of uncertainty it creates.

The Wisconsin purge attempt fits a broader pattern of Republican voter suppression in swing states. Like Georgia’s purges under Brian Kemp, North Carolina’s HB 589, and Florida’s poll tax, the Wisconsin case targets likely Democratic voters in a crucial swing state under the guise of election integrity and voter roll maintenance.

The litigation strategy is particularly insidious. By suing to force immediate purges, WILL creates a situation where either voters are wrongly removed or the Elections Commission faces court sanctions for refusing. This weaponizes the legal system to force suppression that election administrators oppose.

The case demonstrates the importance of election administration details in determining electoral outcomes. Decisions about when and how to maintain voter rolls, what error rates are acceptable, how much time voters have to respond to notices, and when purges occur relative to elections can swing close races. When these decisions are made through partisan litigation rather than expert election administration, democracy suffers.

The Wisconsin purge attempt also highlights the vulnerability of voter registration databases to partisan manipulation. ERIC and similar systems provide valuable tools for maintaining voter rolls, but they require careful use with adequate verification and voter protections. When used aggressively through partisan litigation, they become tools for mass disenfranchisement.