Skip to content
Welcome, thoughtbot's Giant Robots listeners!Start here
US Midterms 2026
7SEP

A third circuit takes the voter-file fight

2 min read
13:32UTC

Legal desk

PoliticsDeveloping
Key takeaway

Three circuits now hold live appeals, which is the department's only route to a precedent.

The Justice Department opened a civil appeal in the Second Circuit on 28 July, docketed as 26-2060, in United States v. Board of Elections of the State of New York. The electronic index was filed in lieu of the record that afternoon, and the district court decision under appeal is dated 10 July.

Counting dismissals has stopped being informative. What the docket adds is geography: the programme now has appeals live in three federal circuits at once, having already lost on the merits at panel level in the Sixth.

Appellate courts do not have to agree with one another, and that is the department's remaining route. A single circuit accepting that the government need not name its statutory authority would give the programme a precedent no district court has been willing to supply. Three simultaneous appeals mean three chances at it, and a split between circuits would put the question where the department has fared better.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

The federal government has asked states to hand over their complete voter registration lists, and has sued the ones that refused. District courts have thrown out those suits repeatedly, mostly because the government has not said which law gives it the right to demand the data. Losing in a district court is not final: the government can appeal to a regional appeals court, and it has now done so in three different regions.

What could happen next?
  • Precedent

    A single favourable circuit ruling would give the programme the statutory-authority precedent no district court has supplied.

  • Risk

    Adverse rulings in multiple circuits would foreclose the programme far more comprehensively than district court dismissals have.

First Reported In

Update #15 · Trump's pick is being outspent in a safe seat

South Carolina State Election Commission· 4 Aug 2026
Read original →
Different Perspectives
Judge Adolf Zeman, Alaska Superior Court
Judge Adolf Zeman, Alaska Superior Court
Zeman refused to dismiss the League of Women Voters, Alaska Black Caucus and ACLU of Alaska suit over the state giving DOJ its unredacted voter list. The privacy claims now go to evidence-gathering under the Alaska Constitution.
Judge Thomas Schroeder, US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Judge Thomas Schroeder, US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
Schroeder refused on 19 October to block the State Board of Elections rule that rejects mail ballots with an unsealed or missing inner envelope. He found the challengers had delayed and that relief was infeasible with voting under way, and pointed to notice-and-cure provisions as a safeguard.
Stephen Richer, Republican former Maricopa County recorder
Stephen Richer, Republican former Maricopa County recorder
Richer submitted a brief on 20 October supporting the voting groups on documentary proof of citizenship at registration. He takes no position on the separate 90-day voter-removal question.
Senate Leadership Fund
Senate Leadership Fund
The Senate Leadership Fund began spending for interim Senator Darline Graham Nordone on 19 October, taking its South Carolina total to $4.06m, including $2.25m against Democrat Annie Andrews. Republicans are now paying to defend a seat in a state Donald Trump carried in 2024.
WinSenate, the ad-buying affiliate of Senate Majority PAC
WinSenate, the ad-buying affiliate of Senate Majority PAC
WinSenate began buying Kansas airtime against Roger Marshall on 10 October and had reported $8.14m there by 20 October. Marshall held $922,088 in cash on 30 September and the NRSC gave him no party money in September, so the Democratic side is spending where the Republican committee has not.
County Board of Arlington County
County Board of Arlington County
Arlington says federal Polling Place Policies allowing armed agents at polling sites breach 18 USC 592, the 1865 ban on troops or armed men at an election. It reads Markwayne Mullin's 1 September remarks as confirming such a policy, and asks Judge Brinkema to keep armed federal staff from its polls and drop boxes.

Written with AI from Lowdown's published reporting. Not individually reviewed by an editor. Editorial standards.