SANTA ANA, CA — A federal judge dismissed the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) lawsuit against the State of California in United States v. Weber, in which the DOJ sought to compel the state to turn over its full, unredacted statewide voter registration list—including voters’ sensitive personal data—to the federal government. The lawsuit was part of a broader series of actions by the DOJ seeking similar information from jurisdictions across the country.
The dismissal comes after the League of Women Voters of California (“LWVC”), represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU Foundation of Northern California, and the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, intervened on behalf of voters to defend voter privacy and the integrity of the democratic process. The groups maintained that state law and federal privacy protections prohibit the disclosure of highly sensitive voter information.
In response to the ruling, the organizations released the following statement:
“The court has recognized the fundamental importance of protecting voters’ sensitive personal information and dismissed this illegal federal overreach. Voters should never have to choose between their privacy and their fundamental right to vote. States must retain authority to manage elections in ways that safeguard sensitive information, and federal agencies must respect the limits on their power. Today’s ruling affirms that the federal government is not entitled to unfettered access to private voter data.”
In September 2025, the DOJ sued California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, seeking to compel disclosure of the statewide voter file that includes registered voters’ full names, residential addresses, dates of birth, driver’s license numbers, and the last four digits of Social Security numbers. California declined to provide this data, citing state privacy laws and offering redacted versions instead. LWVC and the ACLU moved to intervene to defend voter privacy and challenge the DOJ’s legal claims, which raised serious concerns about federal authority over state-managed election data and the potential misuse of sensitive information.
A link to the ruling can be found here.
What might happen next?
The next legal steps primarily involve the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) decision on whether to appeal.
Potential Next Steps
- Appeal Process: The DOJ may appeal Judge David O. Carter’s ruling to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. As of mid-January 2026, the administration has not yet confirmed if it will pursue an appeal.
- Impact on Parallel Litigation: This dismissal is a significant setback for the DOJ’s broader strategy, as it has filed similar lawsuits in 23 other states and the District of Columbia seeking the same type of sensitive voter data. The California ruling may serve as a persuasive precedent for judges overseeing those cases.
- Continuing Local Pressure: Independent of this specific lawsuit, the DOJ has also sent letters to local election officials in major California counties—including Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego—requesting detailed personal information on non-citizens whose registrations were canceled.
Key Details of the Ruling
Judge Carter’s 33-page decision found the government’s request “unprecedented and illegal,” noting:
- Privacy Violations: The demand for Social Security and driver’s license numbers violated multiple federal privacy laws.
- Democratic Integrity: Releasing such data would have a “chilling effect” on voter registration and threaten the cornerstone of American democracy.
- Executive Overreach: The court ruled that the federal government may not unilaterally usurp state authority over managing election data.