Skip to content
Welcome, thoughtbot's Giant Robots listeners!Start here
US Midterms 2026
17OCT

A third circuit takes the voter-file fight

2 min read
17:30UTC

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
James Talarico's campaign
James Talarico's campaign
Talarico's campaign reported raising $56.34m in the quarter to Ken Paxton's $10.17m, and says he has been off the trail since 30 September with flu. Texas PAC, whose only donor is SLF, has spent $131.5m in the race, more than twice what the campaign spent.
Senate Majority PAC, spokesperson Lauren French
Senate Majority PAC, spokesperson Lauren French
French said on 8 October that the Democratic super PAC was watching Kansas closely, but its booked airtime covers nine states and Kansas is not one. Whether SMP spends there decides if Adam Hamilton's 13-to-1 fundraising edge meets outside Republican money alone.
Brad Raffensperger, Georgia Secretary of State
Brad Raffensperger, Georgia Secretary of State
Raffensperger's office reported 188,667 in-person votes on the first day of early voting, a midterm record. He expects turnout to challenge 2022's near 4m.
Sam Hayes, North Carolina State Board of Elections
Sam Hayes, North Carolina State Board of Elections
Hayes's board reported 1,392 SAVE flags, about 0.02% of the roll, and says no voter will be removed automatically. The board is asking flagged voters to cancel or prove citizenship by letter, while eligible voters keep the right to vote on 3 November.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune
Senate Majority Leader John Thune
Thune, the Senate's Republican leader, said the government-paid ads should not be funded by taxpayers. His objection puts the party's own Senate leadership against the administration on the DHS spending.
The White House and Donald Trump
The White House and Donald Trump
The White House calls the five DHS ads public-service announcements with no call to action; Trump called them "rather standard", then said his political fundraising would pay. A White House official said there are no immediate plans to repay.

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