Kennedy v. Lynd
1962 Fifth Circuit ruling upholding a federal demand for Mississippi voting records.
The Justice Department cites Kennedy v. Lynd in its 2026 suits for state voter lists, yet on 30 September a federal judge in Atlanta dismissed the Georgia suit, holding that the 1960 records law does not override Georgia's privacy statute.
Last refreshed: 1 October 2026
Timeline for Kennedy v. Lynd
Mentioned in: Judge dismisses DOJ's Georgia voter suit
US Midterms 2026Background
The case is the foundation of the Justice Department's power to demand voting records from state and local officials, which is why it resurfaced in the department's 2026 voter-list litigation.
The Fifth Circuit decided it on 11 July 1962, reported at 306 F.2d 222. Judge John R. Brown wrote for a panel with Judges Rives and Wisdom. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy had sought registration records from Theron C. Lynd, the registrar of Forrest County, Mississippi, and from four Louisiana parish registrars. The Mississippi district court had treated the demand as abandoned after the department also sued Lynd over discriminatory practices.
The appeals court called a demand under Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 a 'special statutory proceeding' that is 'purely investigative'. A bare statement that the demand was made and refused was enough, with no room to probe its factual basis, and the Court ordered production 'without further delay'. That narrow, procedural holding is what makes the case durable, and also what limits it when a state privacy law stands in the way.
Its records power meets state privacy law
The case gives the Justice Department its strongest line on records: a Title III demand is purely investigative, and a registrar must hand over the records once a written demand has been made and refused. That reading has anchored the department's 2026 push for full state voter files.
It did not decide the Georgia suit. Judge Victoria Marie Calvert dismissed the suit on 30 September 2026, ruling that Title III does not preempt Georgia's protection for voters' dates of birth and Social Security numbers, and barring the department from refiling in her court. The 1962 panel never addressed a clash with a state privacy statute. For the precedent, the losing run shows its limit: it compels production, but says nothing on whether federal law displaces state privacy rules.