Blab Politics
Colorado Judge Dismisses Trump Administrations Voter-Data Lawsuit
In a decisive move that could shape federal‑state disputes over voter data, a Denver judge tossed a Trump‑era lawsuit that sought the most sensitive pieces of Colorado’s voter rolls.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) had requested that Colorado hand over unredacted voter records that included driver’s license numbers and the last four digits of Social Security numbers. Colorado had already supplied the DOJ with its master voter file, which is publicly available, so the DOJ’s lawsuit aimed to obtain additional, highly sensitive information.
U.S. District Court Judge Philip Brimmer, appointed by President George W. Bush in 2008, ruled that the DOJ failed to provide a sufficient reason for needing the unredacted data and that federal law does not grant the department a right to it. Brimmer cited Colorado’s open‑records law, updated in 2024, which explicitly prohibits the release of personal details such as birth dates and signatures. The judge’s opinion dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning the DOJ cannot refile.
Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who has served since 2019, welcomed the decision. In a written statement she said, “Trump and his DOJ are attacking elections and democracy. We will not let them win.” She added that the state law would have barred her from releasing the requested data even if she had chosen to do so and that the DOJ’s request “does not have a legal right to the sensitive information they’re asking for, and we don’t trust what they’re trying to do with it.”
The lawsuit was part of a wave of federal actions launched in December 2025 that sought voter registration lists from at least 15 states. The DOJ has argued that accurate voter rolls are essential for fair elections and that “too many states have fallen into a pattern of noncompliance with basic voter‑roll maintenance,” according to former Attorney General Pam Bondi. According to a tally by the Brennan Center, the Trump administration’s voter‑data lawsuits have now gone 0‑20, with the Colorado case being the most recent dismissal. A similar lawsuit in Michigan was also dismissed, and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision.
Because the dismissal was with prejudice, the DOJ cannot file the same claim again. The department has not yet issued a response to the ruling. The decision fits into a broader pattern of legal battles over voter data, as state officials across the country express concern that the DOJ’s requests could be used to verify citizenship or otherwise influence elections. Colorado’s refusal to provide the sensitive data aligns with the state’s recent open‑records law, which protects personal information.
The ruling leaves Colorado’s master voter file—the only data the DOJ can access—as the sole source of voter information. While the DOJ’s broader effort to obtain unredacted voter rolls from states continues, the Colorado case demonstrates the limits of federal authority in this area.
As the 2026 midterm elections approach, the DOJ’s attempts to secure voter data from states remain a point of contention. The current situation is that the DOJ’s request for Colorado’s sensitive voter information has been dismissed, and the department cannot refile. The case highlights the ongoing legal debate over the balance between federal oversight of elections and state privacy protections.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) had requested that Colorado hand over unredacted voter records that included driver’s license numbers and the last four digits of Social Security numbers. Colorado had already supplied the DOJ with its master voter file, which is publicly available, so the DOJ’s lawsuit aimed to obtain additional, highly sensitive information.
U.S. District Court Judge Philip Brimmer, appointed by President George W. Bush in 2008, ruled that the DOJ failed to provide a sufficient reason for needing the unredacted data and that federal law does not grant the department a right to it. Brimmer cited Colorado’s open‑records law, updated in 2024, which explicitly prohibits the release of personal details such as birth dates and signatures. The judge’s opinion dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning the DOJ cannot refile.
Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who has served since 2019, welcomed the decision. In a written statement she said, “Trump and his DOJ are attacking elections and democracy. We will not let them win.” She added that the state law would have barred her from releasing the requested data even if she had chosen to do so and that the DOJ’s request “does not have a legal right to the sensitive information they’re asking for, and we don’t trust what they’re trying to do with it.”
The lawsuit was part of a wave of federal actions launched in December 2025 that sought voter registration lists from at least 15 states. The DOJ has argued that accurate voter rolls are essential for fair elections and that “too many states have fallen into a pattern of noncompliance with basic voter‑roll maintenance,” according to former Attorney General Pam Bondi. According to a tally by the Brennan Center, the Trump administration’s voter‑data lawsuits have now gone 0‑20, with the Colorado case being the most recent dismissal. A similar lawsuit in Michigan was also dismissed, and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that decision.
Because the dismissal was with prejudice, the DOJ cannot file the same claim again. The department has not yet issued a response to the ruling. The decision fits into a broader pattern of legal battles over voter data, as state officials across the country express concern that the DOJ’s requests could be used to verify citizenship or otherwise influence elections. Colorado’s refusal to provide the sensitive data aligns with the state’s recent open‑records law, which protects personal information.
The ruling leaves Colorado’s master voter file—the only data the DOJ can access—as the sole source of voter information. While the DOJ’s broader effort to obtain unredacted voter rolls from states continues, the Colorado case demonstrates the limits of federal authority in this area.
As the 2026 midterm elections approach, the DOJ’s attempts to secure voter data from states remain a point of contention. The current situation is that the DOJ’s request for Colorado’s sensitive voter information has been dismissed, and the department cannot refile. The case highlights the ongoing legal debate over the balance between federal oversight of elections and state privacy protections.
