The Michigan voter roll lawsuit is United States v. Benson, a federal case the U.S. Department of Justice filed in September 2025 to force Michigan to turn over its full, unredacted voter registration list, including driver’s license numbers, partial Social Security numbers, and dates of birth for more than eight million registered voters. Chief U.S. District Judge Hala Y. Jarbou dismissed the case on February 10, 2026, finding that none of the three federal statutes the DOJ cited actually required Michigan to hand over the data. The DOJ appealed, and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral argument on May 13, 2026. As of mid-June 2026, the three-judge panel had not ruled.1CourtListener. United States v. Jocelyn Benson, Sixth Circuit Docket
What the DOJ Asked For
In the summer of 2025, the DOJ asked Michigan for unredacted copies of the Qualified Voter File, the state’s master registration database. The QVF holds names, addresses, dates of birth, driver’s license numbers, partial Social Security numbers, voting history, and digitized signatures for every registered voter in Michigan.2Michigan Legislature. MCL 168.509q The DOJ said it needed the information to evaluate whether Michigan was complying with federal voter registration laws.
Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson refused. In letters dated September 2 and September 9, 2025, she cited state election statutes, state public disclosure law, and the federal Privacy Act of 1974 as reasons she could not legally release the data.3Michigan Independent. DOJ Lawsuit Over Michigan Voter Rolls an Unconstitutional Power Grab, Benson Says On September 3, 2025, Michigan handed over a redacted public version of the file with personally identifiable information stripped out, and Benson said that version was all the federal government was entitled to.4Votebeat. Justice Department Sues Michigan, Pennsylvania Over Voter Roll Request
Benson called the demand an “illegal and unconstitutional power grab.” In a September 25, 2025, statement she said, “Why does the federal government want access to everyone’s personal information? I have asked them these questions. They refuse to give us a straight answer.”5Michigan Secretary of State. Secretary Benson Statement on U.S. Department of Justice Lawsuit Seeking Michiganders’ Personal Data
The DOJ’s Lawsuit
On September 25, 2025, the DOJ sued Michigan in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan, filing similar suits against five other states the same day.6U.S. Department of Justice. Justice Department Sues Six States for Failure to Provide Voter Registration Rolls It claimed authority under three federal laws: the Civil Rights Act of 1960, the National Voter Registration Act, and the Help America Vote Act.7Michigan Advance. Michigan Among Six States Sued by Justice Department Over Voter Registration Rolls
The DOJ’s core argument was that whenever a person registers to vote or updates their information, the data “comes into possession” of the Secretary of State’s office, which it said made the voter file a record subject to federal inspection under the Civil Rights Act.8Courthouse News Service. Feds Demand Michigan Voter Registration Lists at Appeals Court
Several outside groups entered the case. The Michigan Alliance for Retired Americans and two individual voters, Donald Duquette and Keely Crimando, intervened as defendants on December 9, 2025, and filed their own motion to dismiss.9CourtListener. United States v. Benson, Docket The League of Women Voters of Michigan, represented by the Campaign Legal Center and the Brennan Center for Justice, filed an amicus brief calling the DOJ demand a “fishing expedition” and warning that federal collection of driver’s license and partial Social Security numbers would discourage people from registering.10Brennan Center for Justice. League of Women Voters of Michigan Seeks to Protect Voters From Justice Department
Why the Judge Dismissed the Case
On February 10, 2026, Judge Jarbou, a Trump appointee confirmed to the Western District of Michigan in September 2020, rejected each of the DOJ’s three statutory theories.11Federal Judicial Center. Jarbou, Hala Yalda
She ruled that the Help America Vote Act does not require disclosure of any voter records. She held that Michigan’s electronic voter list is not a “list maintenance record” subject to disclosure under the National Voter Registration Act. And she concluded that the QVF is not a “paper or record” that comes into an election official’s possession under the Civil Rights Act of 1960, siding with Michigan’s argument that the file is a self-generated, perpetually maintained database rather than a collection of individual records arriving at the Secretary of State’s office.12Michigan Attorney General. Federal Court Dismisses DOJ Lawsuit8Courthouse News Service. Feds Demand Michigan Voter Registration Lists at Appeals Court
The court added that forcing disclosure of driver’s license numbers and Social Security numbers would “contradict the NVRA’s objective of increasing voter participation” and could impose “an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote guaranteed by the First Amendment.”13Michigan Advance. Federal Judge Dismisses Trump Administration Attempt to Access Michigan Voter Rolls
Attorney General Dana Nessel, who filed the motion to dismiss for the state, said the Trump administration had “attempted to unlawfully force Michigan into handing over private, sensitive information of millions of voters with no legal basis.” Benson called the ruling “a victory for the citizens of Michigan and the rule of law.”12Michigan Attorney General. Federal Court Dismisses DOJ Lawsuit
The Sixth Circuit Appeal
The DOJ appealed on February 27, 2026. In March, the Sixth Circuit partially granted the DOJ’s request for an expedited briefing schedule.14Votebeat. Michigan Voter Roll Case DOJ Appeal Supreme Court The Michigan Alliance for Retired Americans and the individual intervenors filed a brief in mid-April 2026.15Democracy Docket. Michigan DOJ Voter Data Access Challenge
On April 22, 2026, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed an amicus brief for nine bipartisan former secretaries of state, arguing that the Constitution gives states primary authority over elections, that the NVRA and HAVA confirm state control over voter roll maintenance, and that the DOJ’s demand for Social Security and driver’s license numbers violates the federal Privacy Act.16Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. CREW Files Amicus Brief on Behalf of Bipartisan Former Secretaries of State in Appeal of Michigan Voter Rolls Suit
Oral argument took place on May 13, 2026. The three-judge panel had not issued a decision as of mid-June 2026.1CourtListener. United States v. Jocelyn Benson, Sixth Circuit Docket Legal observers have said the DOJ is pushing for a fast resolution in hopes of reaching the Supreme Court before the November 2026 midterms.14Votebeat. Michigan Voter Roll Case DOJ Appeal Supreme Court Parallel appeals from California and Oregon were argued in the Ninth Circuit on May 19, 2026, and at least one other case has been stayed to wait on those outcomes.17State Democracy Research Initiative. Tracker: DOJ Lawsuits Seeking States’ Sensitive Voter Data
Michigan Is One of More Than 30 States Sued
Since May 2025, the DOJ has demanded unredacted voter rolls from at least 44 states and the District of Columbia and has sued more than 30 jurisdictions that refused.18Brennan Center for Justice. Trump Administration Has Sued More Than 20 States Refusing to Turn Over Voter Data By June 2026, federal district courts had dismissed the DOJ’s suits in eight states: Arizona, California, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin. The DOJ appealed all eight dismissals.17State Democracy Research Initiative. Tracker: DOJ Lawsuits Seeking States’ Sensitive Voter Data
At least 15 states have agreed to turn over their full, unredacted lists, among them Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Ohio, and Texas.19Brennan Center for Justice. Tracker: Justice Department Requests for Voter Information The DOJ also circulated a confidential draft Memorandum of Understanding under which a state would hand over its rolls, the DOJ would flag voters it considered ineligible, and the state would remove those voters within 45 days. The draft also authorized the DOJ to share the data with an unnamed contractor.20Stateline. Trump’s DOJ Offers States Confidential Deal to Wipe Voters Flagged by Feds as Ineligible Alaska signed such an agreement on December 23, 2025.21Alaska Division of Elections. Lt. Governor Submits Alaska Voter Registration List to the U.S. Department of Justice
Other Michigan Voter Roll Cases People Confuse With This One
Two other recent lawsuits challenged Michigan’s voter rolls, but neither is the DOJ case. Both ended in Michigan’s favor.
RNC v. Benson
In March 2024, the Republican National Committee and two individual voters sued Benson in the Western District of Michigan, arguing that registration rates in most Michigan counties were “too high” and that the state was not purging rolls aggressively enough under the NVRA.22League of Women Voters. Republican National Committee v. Benson The district court dismissed the case for lack of standing in October 2024, and on September 25, 2025, a Sixth Circuit panel affirmed, calling the RNC’s claimed economic injuries “speculative” and “hypothetical.”23Courthouse News Service. Appeals Court Blocks Republicans’ Attempt to Purge Michigan Voter Rolls
Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Benson
The Public Interest Legal Foundation sued Benson in November 2021, alleging that roughly 26,000 deceased voters remained on the rolls in violation of the NVRA. The district court and the Sixth Circuit both ruled against PILF. In a May 2025 opinion, the appeals court held that Michigan’s layered approach to removing deceased registrants, which uses Social Security death records, local death notifications, and data from the Electronic Registration Information Center, exceeds the “reasonable effort” federal law requires. The court noted that the 27,000 names PILF identified represented about 0.3% of Michigan’s 8.2 million registered voters.24U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Benson, Opinion25Michigan Secretary of State. Federal Court Affirms That Michigan’s Work to Remove Deceased Voters From State Rolls Is Reasonable On March 2, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear PILF’s appeal, leaving the Sixth Circuit ruling in place.26Michigan Public. U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Hear Challenge to Michigan Voter Roll Maintenance
What to Watch Next
The next move belongs to the Sixth Circuit. If it affirms Judge Jarbou’s dismissal, the DOJ’s demand for Michigan’s unredacted voter data is blocked unless the Supreme Court intervenes. If the circuit courts split, with the Sixth or Ninth going one way and another going the other, Supreme Court review becomes likelier, and a ruling could land before the November 2026 midterms.