Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon recently announced the U.S. Department of Justice’s aggressive legal initiative aimed at ensuring only American citizens are permitted to vote in upcoming elections. This move signals a notable escalation in efforts to uphold election integrity, particularly in battleground states like Georgia. The ambition behind these lawsuits is clear: to secure full access to state and local voter registration databases alongside crucial records from the contentious 2020 election.
In her statements, Dhillon emphasized, “We will not permit states to jeopardize the integrity and effectiveness of elections by refusing to abide by our federal election laws.” This declaration reflects a firm stance on upholding federal mandates, with the DOJ focusing on obtaining vital election materials, including signature envelopes and ballot stubs, deemed necessary for investigations into alleged non-citizen voting.
Fulton County, Georgia, has become a focal point in this legal landscape. On December 8, 2023, the DOJ filed a lawsuit against Ché Alexander, the county clerk, for denying access to sealed 2020 election documents. The DOJ argues that these materials are essential for probing claims of vote dilution, with Dhillon asserting, “Our duty is to preserve and protect [citizens] from vote dilution.” This underscores the administration’s commitment to ensuring that the electoral process is safeguarded against ineligible participation.
In response, Alexander stated that the requested records are legally sealed and cannot be disclosed without a court order. Her office has since moved to dismiss the DOJ’s claims, labeling them as lacking a legal foundation. This legal back-and-forth highlights the tensions between federal authority and state law, especially in Georgia, which has been rife with election-related controversy since 2020.
The DOJ’s campaign is not isolated to Georgia. Since July 2023, lawsuits have been filed against at least 22 states and Washington, D.C., including states where Democrats saw success in the last presidential election. This wide-ranging effort seeks not only access to voter rolls but also includes sensitive personal information—data that the DOJ plans to compare with Department of Homeland Security (DHS) records to validate voter eligibility.
However, this campaign has not gone without criticism. Voting rights advocates and Democrat officials express concern over what they see as the DOJ’s reliance on unfounded claims. Max Flugrath, from the voting rights organization Fair Fight, warned of an abuse of federal power, asserting the DOJ is “recycling conspiracy theories that’ve been disproven in court.” This skepticism raises questions about the motivations behind the DOJ’s expansive legal tactics.
Despite these criticisms, Dhillon stands firm in her belief that the law is on the DOJ’s side. “The law is clear: states need to give us this information,” she stated, linking the denial of data access to violations of the Help America Vote Act and the National Voter Registration Act. While legal scholars note that these laws support voter roll maintenance, they also caution against mandatory disclosure of personal information to the federal government.
The DOJ’s legal strategy has met with a series of operational issues. Reports of clerical errors, misaddressed demands, and even the submission of draft motions have raised eyebrows concerning the Civil Rights Division’s competence. In Wisconsin, for instance, the DOJ’s request for election data was swiftly dismissed by state officials who highlighted legal and privacy issues. Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul characterized the DOJ’s actions as a pursuit of “chasing conspiracy theories.”
Colorado’s Secretary of State, Jena Griswold, echoed similar sentiments, asserting, “We will not hand over Coloradans’ sensitive voting information.” Such resistance reflects a broader pushback against federal overreach and a commitment to protecting state-managed election processes. Critics argue that these actions feed into ongoing narratives doubting the credibility of the 2020 election.
While the DOJ has not presented direct evidence of voter fraud, officials argue that access to voting records is essential in verifying election integrity. There remains a significant concern about non-citizens being registered to vote via automatic systems or bureaucratic errors—issues particularly pronounced in close races. The use of DHS tools is central to the DOJ’s approach in validating citizenship status, with Dhillon emphasizing the prevention of “vote dilution” as a priority.
Fulton County’s status as a legal battleground continues, exacerbated by ongoing federal scrutiny. Recently, the FBI executed a warrant at an election storage facility in Union City, reiterating the heightened federal interest in 2020 election records. This added layer of investigation reflects the continuing fallout from the 2020 electoral cycle, which remains a contentious topic in both legal and political arenas.
Criminal charges have also been levied against former President Trump and others regarding efforts to overturn the election results in Georgia, complicating the narrative further. Despite multiple recounts affirming Biden’s victory, the impacts of 2020 linger, with the potential for increased scrutiny on voter data and election legitimacy shaping future electoral landscapes.
With an array of ongoing lawsuits and expected court rulings, the battle surrounding voter data access and election integrity is poised to affect standards of voter eligibility enforcement going forward. Harmeet Dhillon’s role within the DOJ illustrates a renewed federal commitment to influencing how states handle voter information, raising essential constitutional questions and inciting vigorous opposition from critics who view these moves as an overreach of federal authority. The final outcomes of these legal battles will likely resonate far beyond local jurisdictions, setting new precedents in the management of voter integrity across the nation.
"*" indicates required fields
