Feds demand Michigan voter registration lists at appeals court

CINCINNATI (CN) — State election officials must provide unredacted, electronic versions of voter registration lists to the federal government to comply with the Civil Rights Act and maintain election integrity, the federal government argued Wednesday at the Sixth Circuit.

Michigan's Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson found herself in the crosshairs of the federal government in August 2025 after she refused its request for the state's unredacted voter registration list.

According to officials at the Department of Justice, several "irregularities" — including lower than average voter removal and inadequate voter confirmation numbers — raised concerns Michigan might not be in compliance with the National Voter Registration Act.

Benson handed over the public version of the registration list but denied the government an unredacted copy based on her interpretation of both federal laws.

A federal lawsuit followed, and Chief U.S. District Judge Hala Jarbou, a Donald Trump appointee, sided with Benson.

Jarbou determined the unredacted, electronic version of the voter registration list "was neither a record nor paper that came into the possession of Benson," which excluded it from disclosure.

The case hinges on the interpretation of the phrase "comes into possession of," found in the Civil Rights Act, and which Jarbou decided does not cover documents created by state election officials.

Therefore, according to Benson, the self-generated voter list never comes into possession of her office, a point the federal government disputes.

Attorney David Goldman from the U.S. Department of Justice argued Wednesday before the appeals court and told the panel Jarbou "created a carve-out for state-generated records that has no basis in the act."

"So are the words 'come into' surplus?" asked Senior U.S. Circuit Judge R. Guy Cole Jr., a Bill Clinton appointee.

"No, they are not surplusage," Goldman answered. "'Comes into possession' provides a temporal distinction. The words have meaning."

"What about common sense?" asked U.S. Circuit Judge John Nalbandian, a Trump appointee. "If you say you baked a cake, you don't say you 'came into possession' of a cake."

"The distinction doesn't make a lot of sense in the context of what the act is trying to accomplish," the government's attorney said.

The point was hammered home in the federal government's brief to the appeals court.

"Secretary Benson acquired the relevant records from individual voters in the course of carrying out her duties as Secretary of State," the government said. "The secretary 'comes into possession' of a covered 'record' every time an individual voter adds or changes their registration information electronically, at the DMV, at a local polling place, or through a volunteer voter drive."

Assistant Michigan Attorney General Heather Meingast argued on behalf of Benson and criticized the federal government's overreach.

"The Department of Justice seeks the private information of over 8 million registered voters, a request that is unprecedented and unsupported by the law," she told the panel.

The state's attorney emphasized language in the Civil Rights Act that requires election officials to retain only those documents related to specific elections, not an evolving and updated document like the voter list.

Benson also disputed the government's claim she failed to properly purge voter rolls in her brief.

"Since 2019 the Michigan Bureau of Elections, in conjunction with local clerks, has engaged in rigorous list maintenance practices under Secretary Benson's supervision," she wrote. "From 2019 to March 2025, the bureau and local clerks canceled more than 1.4 million voter registrations, including 635,052 for deceased voters, 588,247 for voters who failed to respond to change-of-residence notices and had no subsequent voter activity, and 18,489 at voters' own request."

Attorney Aria Branch from the Washington D.C. firm Elias Law Group LLP split time with Meingast and argued on behalf of the Michigan Alliance for Retired Americans and several individuals who intervened in the case.

She reiterated that no documents created by the secretary of state are subject to disclosure and pointed out the voter list could not be provided to the federal government because it "is constantly changing and is perpetually maintained."

Cole questioned the federal government's attorney about that issue.

"This list is subject to ongoing changes, it's not a static document," he said. "How would that be handled, practically? Does Michigan have to provide it daily, weekly, monthly?"

"We have not asked them to continuously turn these documents over," Goldman said.

Nalbandian asked the intervenors' attorney about a hypothetical scenario in which a county clerk sends voter registration documents to the secretary of state's office.

"Is that a document that 'comes into possession' of the state?" he asked.

Branch agreed that it would be required for disclosure, but reiterated no self-generated documents have to be provided to federal officials.

U.S. Circuit Judge Andre Mathis, a Joe Biden appointee, rounded out the panel.

No timetable has been set for the court's decision.