7SEP

Judge dismisses DOJ's Georgia voter suit

2 min read

13:32UTC

Judge Victoria Marie Calvert threw out the Justice Department's demand for Georgia's unredacted voter list on 30 September, holding that a 1960 civil-rights law does not override the state's privacy rules.

← Back to Missouri suspends its map, and votes on it Jump to analysis ↓

PoliticsAssessed

Key takeaway

A federal judge ruled that Georgia's privacy law shields its voter data from the Justice Department.

Judge Victoria Marie Calvert of the Northern District of Georgia, the federal trial court in Atlanta, dismissed the Department of Justice's suit for Georgia's unredacted voter list on 30 September, without leave to amend, so the department cannot file a revised complaint in the case⁠¹. United States v. Raffensperger is one of the department's suits against about 30 states and the District of Columbia for full voter lists. Calvert held that Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 does not preempt Georgia's voter-privacy law.

Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, need not hand over dates of birth, Social Security numbers or driver licence numbers. Footnote 17 sets out why. Georgia law releases confidential voter data to a federal agency only if it is used solely to identify the voter and kept confidential, and the Court found the department "has disavowed that its purpose is limited to identifying the elector in its database and has not agreed that the information would remain confidential".

The department's refusal to accept those limits, more than any federal supremacy argument, kept the data under Georgia law. Democracy Docket, a litigation tracker founded by Democratic lawyer Marc Elias, counts the ruling as the department's 26th straight loss in these suits, one more than the Washington dismissal of 23 September⁠².

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Every state keeps a list of registered voters. The US Justice Department has sued about 30 states and Washington, DC, for their full lists, including private details such as dates of birth and Social Security numbers. Georgia's Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, is a Republican. He sent a version with those private details removed, citing Georgia's privacy law. On 30 September Judge Victoria Marie Calvert, in Atlanta, said Georgia was right to do so. The judge dismissed the case without leave to amend, so the department cannot simply fix its complaint and refile in her court. It can still appeal.

Deep Analysis

Root Causes

Georgia law lets confidential voter data go to a federal agency only if the agency uses it solely to identify voters and keeps it confidential. Raffensperger had already sent a redacted list after his letter of 8 December 2025. The department wanted the withheld fields: dates of birth, Social Security numbers and driver licence numbers.

The department first sued in Georgia's Middle District, lost on jurisdiction in January 2026 and refiled with a single Title III claim. That narrowed the case to one question, whether a 1960 records statute overrides a state privacy law, and Judge Calvert answered no.

Georgia already shares data with ERIC, the multi-state list-checking group, through one-way hashing. the Court found that consistent with state law, which shows the state has a lawful route for cross-checks that does not hand over raw numbers.

What could happen next?

Precedent
A Republican-run election office has now beaten the department's voter-list demand, so the losing run no longer divides along party lines.
Risk
An appeal to the 11th Circuit would put Title III's reach over state voter-privacy laws before a second tier of judges.

Source Landscape

This story draws on neutral-leaning sources

Primary parallel: In Kennedy v. Lynd in 1962 the 5th Circuit upheld the Justice Department's Title III demand for voting records in Forrest County, Mississippi, where Black residents were being refused registration. The law was built to expose discrimination by local registrars, and the courts enforced it for that purpose.

Counter-parallel: In 2017 the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity asked every state for its voter file, including partial Social Security numbers. Many states refused the sensitive fields, and the commission disbanded in January 2018 without a national list.

Consensus view: Judge Calvert found that Title III of the Civil Rights Act of 1960 does not preempt Georgia's privacy statute, O.C.G.A. 21-2-225(b), in any of the three ways preemption can work. Her footnote 17 records the decisive fact: the department 'has disavowed that its purpose is limited to identifying the elector' and would not agree to keep the data confidential.

Counter-view: The department reads Title III as a federal power to inspect election records that a state statute cannot narrow. Its losing run, now including the Washington dismissal of 23 September, shows district judges rejecting that reading in state after state.

Key tension: Whether the department wants the data to check rolls or to build a national file. Its refusal to limit its own use, on the record in Georgia, is what kept the state's law in force.

First Reported In

Update #19 · Bulk voter citizenship checks are back

US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia· 1 Oct 2026

Read original →

Causes and effects

Caused by

Dhillon plans 1,000 DOJ poll monitors

The Georgia dismissal extended DOJ's losing run one past the 23 September Washington dismissal.

Occurred 22 Sept 2026

Read story →

This Event

Judge dismisses DOJ's Georgia voter suit

The Justice Department's drive for states' full voter lists has now lost even against a Republican-run election office, and in Georgia it cannot refile.

Led to

Judge voids DOJ's SAVE voter-roll policy

The Georgia dismissal preceded a ruling against DOJ's whole voter-roll policy.

Occurred 9 Oct 2026

Read story →

DOJ seeks to freeze 20,000 mail ballots

DOJ's Georgia voter-list suit was an earlier roll fight before the California ballot demand.

Occurred 21 Oct 2026

Read story →

Judge Zeman keeps Alaska voter-list suit

DOJ's demands for unredacted state voter lists drew privacy suits in Georgia and Alaska.

Occurred 16 Oct 2026

Read story →

Different Perspectives

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

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

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

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 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

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.