Litigio
U.S. v. Pennsylvania
Enlaces y descargas
Pennsylvania Voter Privacy Victory: Common Cause Intervenes in DOJ Lawsuit
Last year, Common Cause filed a motion to intervene in a lawsuit brought by the Department of Justice against Pennsylvania that demands it hand over its voter file. A district court has granted our motion, meaning Common Cause is now party to the lawsuit, and we are seeking its dismissal.
The Conflict Between Federal Demands and Pennsylvania State Privacy Laws
By law, states, not the federal government, have the authority to maintain their voter files, which contain sensitive information including full names, addresses, dates of birth, driver’s license and partial Social Security numbers. However, the Trump administration has been on a quest to collect these databases to assemble their own master voter file, a move that threatens the integrity of our elections y risks disenfranchising many Americans ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
Secretary Al Schmidt and Pennsylvania’s Resistance to Data Seizure
Most of these states, including Pennsylvania, have resisted pressure from the DOJ to hand over voter data. Secretary of the Commonwealth Al Schmidt has explained that the request is at odds with both state and federal law. Now, they’re among the several states being sued for the voter file by the Trump administration. In response, Common Cause has filed motions to intervene in several of these lawsuits. Our motion in Pennsylvania was granted.
What’s next in this case?
Moving forward, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Common Cause, and its partners are seeking the dismissal of this lawsuit, which would reject the Trump administrations attempt to collect this sensitive data.
What is at risk if the DOJ gets ahold of state voter files?
Trump has repeatedly signaled his willingness to undermine our democracy to stay in power. Whether continuing to spread disproven conspiracies about the 2020 election o calling on Republicans to “nationalize the voting,” he has shown time and again that winning is more important to him than a fair and free democracy.
Demanding state voter files is another attempt to undermine states’ statutory power to manage elections, and the disenfranchisement that the Trump administration could carry out with a master national voter file is deeply concerning.
A list like this could be used to conduct strategic and widespread purges of eligible voters from voter rolls, including purges that are targeted based on factors like location, age, and gender in an effort to gain a partisan advantage.
And given the Department of Homeland Security’s cruel attacks on immigrants and communities of color, regardless of their citizenship status, a potential federal database like this poses even greater risk – already, the DOJ has acknowledged that it is sharing voter information with DHS. Knowing that the federal government has collected a database of sensitive information could intimidate potential voters from these communities and prevent them from registering to vote.
F.A.Q.
Why is Secretary Al Schmidt refusing to hand over Pennsylvania’s voter file?
Secretary Al Schmidt has stated that the DOJ’s demand for unredacted voter files violates both Pennsylvania state law and federal statutes. The state argues that sensitive data—such as full Social Security digits and driver’s license numbers—is protected to prevent identity theft and voter intimidation.
What is the "Master Voter File" and how does it affect the 2026 midterms?
The “Master Voter File” is a centralized federal database the administration aims to build by seizing state records. Advocates warn this database could be used to conduct targeted voter purges ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, potentially removing eligible voters based on partisan demographics to influence the outcome.
How does DOJ and DHS data sharing impact Pennsylvania voters?
The DOJ has admitted to sharing voter records with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). This cooperation is a major concern for civil rights groups, as it may be used to target immigrant communities and voters of color, creating a “chilling effect” that discourages eligible citizens from registering or voting.
