DOJ Expands Voter Data Seizure Campaign to 18 States, Demanding Social Security Numbers and Driver's Licenses

The Department of Justice announced on December 12, 2025 that it had sued four additional states—Colorado, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Nevada—demanding complete, unredacted voter registration lists including driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers, bringing the total number of states sued to 18. This represents an unprecedented federal campaign to create a centralized national voter database, with the DOJ having contacted at least 40 states since May 2025 demanding sensitive voter information.

The 18 states sued are: California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington—all states that Trump lost in the 2020 election and predominantly led by Democratic administrations. The DOJ also sued Fulton County, Georgia for 2020 election records. Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon claimed the lawsuits enforce federal election laws including the National Voter Registration Act, Help America Vote Act, and Civil Rights Act of 1960, while announcing that DOJ investigations had identified 260,000 deceased individuals and thousands of alleged non-citizens on voter rolls.

State officials mounted fierce resistance, with Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth Bill Galvin condemning the lawsuit as “simply another example of the Trump Department of Justice’s campaign to intimidate states” and refusing to hand over voter personal data for “outrageous fishing expeditions.” Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold declared “We will not hand over Coloradans’ sensitive voting information to Donald Trump,” while Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell stated “The privacy of Massachusetts voters is not up for negotiation” and pledged to defend against misuse of voter information for a “cruel and harmful agenda.”

Civil liberties organizations filed motions to intervene in multiple lawsuits to protect voter privacy. The ACLU and Common Cause intervened in Rhode Island’s case, with the ACLU of Rhode Island calling the federal probe “a major threat to the privacy of Rhode Island voters,” warning that “Drivers’ licenses and social security numbers provided as part of the voter registration process are sensitive pieces of information that deserve to be protected and that the Department of Justice has absolutely no legitimate need for.” In California, the court granted intervention motions from the NAACP, League of Women Voters, and SIREN, with these organizations arguing that releasing sensitive voter data would “violate state privacy laws and chill voter participation, particularly among Black and immigrant voters.”

Election security experts raised alarms about the unprecedented nature of the data collection effort. David Becker, founder of the Center for Election Innovation & Research and former DOJ attorney, stated “It appears the Justice Department is trying to acquire sensitive information on all Americans for who knows what purpose, with very, very questionable statutory authority.” Becker warned that “All of these seem designed not to create a viable election policy, but to lay the groundwork to claim the 2026 and 2028 elections are stolen.” The Brennan Center for Justice documented the campaign and noted that organizations warned the DOJ effort represents “a national voter database, which Congress has never authorized,” with potential for “large-scale voter purges based on faulty database matching techniques cooked up by election deniers.”

The voter data seizure program represents a comprehensive federal surveillance infrastructure targeting American voters, with states raising concerns that the DOJ intends to use the information “for the enforcement of immigration laws” or “in a manner that intimidates a voter.” Privacy concerns were heightened by the DOJ’s refusal to guarantee data protection under the Privacy Act of 1974, with Minnesota reporting it asked DOJ to guarantee data security but received no response before being sued. Only two states—Indiana and Wyoming—voluntarily provided complete voter rolls to the DOJ.

This escalation follows earlier DOJ voter data demands documented since May 2025, with the department having reviewed 47.5 million voter records across nearly 30 states by December. The creation of an unprecedented centralized federal voter database, combined with the DOJ’s parallel gutting of voting rights enforcement, represents what civil liberties advocates characterize as infrastructure for mass voter suppression, intimidation, and potential purges—particularly targeting Democratic-led states and communities of color—while establishing the groundwork to challenge legitimate election results in 2026 and 2028.